首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>BMC Medical Research Methodology >Assessing regression to the mean effects in health care initiatives
【2h】

Assessing regression to the mean effects in health care initiatives

机译:评估对医疗保健措施的平均影响的回归

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

BackgroundInterventions targeting individuals classified as “high-risk” have become common-place in health care. High-risk may represent outlier values on utilization, cost, or clinical measures. Typically, such individuals are invited to participate in an intervention intended to reduce their level of risk, and after a period of time, a follow-up measurement is taken. However, individuals initially identified by their outlier values will likely have lower values on re-measurement in the absence of an intervention. This statistical phenomenon is known as “regression to the mean” (RTM) and often leads to an inaccurate conclusion that the intervention caused the effect. Concerns about RTM are rarely raised in connection with most health care interventions, and it is uncommon to find evaluators who estimate its effect. This may be due to lack of awareness, cognitive biases that may cause people to systematically misinterpret RTM effects by creating (erroneous) explanations to account for it, or by design.
机译:背景技术针对被归类为“高危”人群的干预措施已经在医疗保健中司空见惯。高风险可能表示利用率,成本或临床措施的异常值。通常,邀请此类个人参加旨在降低其风险水平的干预措施,并在一段时间后进行后续测量。但是,在没有干预措施的情况下,最初由其异常值确定的个人在重新测量时可能会具有较低的值。这种统计现象被称为“均值回归”(RTM),通常会得出不准确的结论,即干预导致了效果。大多数医疗保健干预措施很少引起人们对RTM的担忧,而且很少找到评估其效果的评估者。这可能是由于意识不足,认知偏见可能导致人们通过创建(错误的)解释来解释RTM效果或设计使系统地误解RTM效果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号