...
首页> 外文期刊>Brain >Reply: A plea for confidence intervals and consideration of generalizability in diagnostic studies
【24h】

Reply: A plea for confidence intervals and consideration of generalizability in diagnostic studies

机译:答复:呼吁置信区间并考虑诊断研究的普遍性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Sir, We read with interest the recent article by Klo ¨ ppel andncolleagues (2008) on automatic classification of MR scans innAlzheimer’s disease and the coverage on the BBC’s website.nIn particular, we were concerned that the claim on the websitenthat ‘computers ‘‘spot Alzheimer’s fast’’ ’ cannot be justified onnthe basis of this research. Although the authors do not makenthis claim in their paper, in our opinion they do not pay enoughnattention to two limitations of their work, which may havenencouraged the media over-interpretation of their findings.
机译:主席先生,我们感兴趣地阅读了Klo¨ppelandncolleagues(2008)最近发表的有关MR扫描对阿尔茨海默氏病的自动分类以及BBC网站覆盖范围的文章。n特别是,我们对网站上的“计算机”斑点声称感到关注。阿尔茨海默氏症的斋戒不能以这项研究为基础。尽管作者没有在论文中提出这种主张,但在我们看来,他们对工作的两个局限性没有给予足够的重视,这可能不利于媒体对其发现的过度解释。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Brain 》 |2009年第4期| p.1-1| 共1页
  • 作者单位

    Medical Statistics Unit, Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine,London WC1E 7HT, UK;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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