Best (but oft-forgotten) practices: expressing and interpreting associations and effect sizes in clinical outcome assessments.
نویسندگان
چکیده
This article reviews methods used to facilitate the interpretation and evaluation of group-level differences in clinical outcome assessments. These methods complement and supplement tests of statistical significance. Examples, including studies in nutrition, are used to illustrate the application of the interpretation methods for group-level comparisons from experimental or observational studies. In addition, specific pitfalls of evaluating change in meta-analysis studies are described. A set of recommendations is provided. This review is intended as an introduction for the novice and as a refresher for the experienced researcher.
منابع مشابه
Best (but oft-forgotten) practices: checking assumptions concerning regression residuals.
The residuals of a least squares regression model are defined as the observations minus the modeled values. For least squares regression to produce valid CIs and P values, the residuals must be independent, be normally distributed, and have a constant variance. If these assumptions are not satisfied, estimates can be biased and power can be reduced. However, there are ways to assess these assum...
متن کاملBest (but oft-forgotten) practices: the design, analysis, and interpretation of Mendelian randomization studies.
Mendelian randomization (MR) is an increasingly important tool for appraising causality in observational epidemiology. The technique exploits the principle that genotypes are not generally susceptible to reverse causation bias and confounding, reflecting their fixed nature and Mendel’s first and second laws of inheritance. The approach is, however, subject to important limitations and assumptio...
متن کاملA Review Study: Clinical Assessment of Patients With Thoracic Outlet Syndrome
Purpose: Thoracic outlet syndrome is one of the most controversial topics in clinical medicine due to its difficult assessment and management. The appropriate treatment depends on accurate and comprehensive assessment. This study aimed to review the current assessments of these patients. Methods: This study was conducted by review of the articles published between 1990 and 2014. Search was con...
متن کاملInterpreting the Validity of a High-Stakes Test in Light of the Argument-Based Framework: Implications for Test Improvement
The validity of large-scale assessments may be compromised, partly due to their content inappropriateness or construct underrepresentation. Few validity studies have focused on such assessments within an argument-based framework. This study analyzed the domain description and evaluation inference of the Ph.D. Entrance Exam of ELT (PEEE) sat by Ph.D. examinees (n = 999) in 2014 in Iran....
متن کاملBest (but oft-forgotten) practices: sensitivity analyses in randomized controlled trials.
A randomized controlled clinical trial is the best way to minimize bias in ascertaining treatment effects, but the credibility of the results of a trial depends on the validity of the methods used to analyze the data, and the conditions under which such methods produce valid answers. A sensitivity analysis is a method to determine the robustness of trial findings by examining the extent to whic...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- The American journal of clinical nutrition
دوره 103 3 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2016