首页> 外文期刊>Science >Ambiguous Evidence
【24h】

Ambiguous Evidence

机译:证据不明确

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Two of the methodologies used to compare the efficacies of treatments are randomized placement of participants in experimental studies and statistical or propensity matching of participants on confounding variables in observational studies. Both approaches have their proponents and might plausibly carry comparable weight in evidentiary assessments. Bastardi et al. developed a scenario in which a matching study (in comparison to a randomized one) was described as favoring home care of children to one group of participants, whereas a second group of participants received the information that the matching study favored day care. All of the participants were soon to become parents, and their preexisting belief was that home care was superior, although half of them were intending to use day care. When confronted with these scenarios in a crossed design, those who intended to use home care for their children did not judge one methodology to be more reliable than the other and maintained their stance about the superiority of home care.
机译:用于比较治疗效果的两种方法是实验研究中参与者的随机分配以及观察研究中混杂变量的参与者统计或倾向匹配。两种方法都有其支持者,并且在证据评估中可能具有可比的分量。 Bastardi等。提出了一种方案,在该方案中,将一项匹配研究(与一项随机研究相比)描述为一组参与者偏爱儿童的家庭护理,而另一组参与者收到了该匹配研究偏爱日托的信息。所有参与者很快都将成为父母,他们先前的信念是家庭护理更为优越,尽管其中一半人打算使用日托。当在交叉设计中面对这些情况时,那些打算为孩子使用家庭护理的人并没有认为一种方法比另一种方法更可靠,并坚持其对家庭护理优越性的立场。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Science》 |2011年第6032期|p.896|共1页
  • 作者

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《工程索引》(EI);美国《生物学医学文摘》(MEDLINE);美国《化学文摘》(CA);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-18 02:54:01

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