首页> 外文期刊>British journal of ophthalmology >The Early vs Late Infantile Strabismus Surgery Study: do sources for bias exist in this non-randomised trial? Early vs Late Infantile Strabismus Surgery Study Group.
【24h】

The Early vs Late Infantile Strabismus Surgery Study: do sources for bias exist in this non-randomised trial? Early vs Late Infantile Strabismus Surgery Study Group.

机译:婴幼儿斜视的早期与晚期研究:这项非随机试验中是否存在偏见的来源?早期与晚期婴儿斜视手术研究组。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

BACKGROUND: The Early vs Late Infantile Strabismus Surgery Study Group investigates whether early or late surgery is preferable in infantile convergent strabismus, in a non-randomised, prospective, multicentre clinical trial. The current state of the study after end of recruitment is reported here, focusing on the question of possible sources for bias in this non-randomised trial. METHOD: The prognostic factors were analysed at baseline in order to check for imbalances between the two treatment groups. Reasons for possible differences are discussed. RESULTS: There is no evidence for clinically relevant inhomogeneities between the two groups concerning the distribution of the three prognostic factors spherical equivalent, degree of amblyopia, and limitation of abduction. The fourth prognostic factor, horizontal angle of squint, differs significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In the analysis of the final results we may have to account for differences in angle of squint at baseline by its inclusion as a covariate or by stratification.
机译:背景:早期与晚期婴儿斜视手术研究小组在一项非随机,前瞻性,多中心临床试验中,调查了早期或晚期手术在婴儿会聚性斜视中是否可取。此处报道了招募结束后的研究现状,重点是该非随机试验中可能产生偏倚的问题。方法:在基线时分析预后因素,以检查两个治疗组之间的不平衡。讨论了可能存在差异的原因。结果:没有证据表明两组之间在临床上相关的不均一性涉及三个等效球面分布,弱视程度和外展受限的因素。两组的第四个预后因素是斜视的水平角度。结论:在对最终结果的分析中,我们可能必须考虑斜视角度在基线时的差异,方法是将斜视角度作为协变量或分层。

著录项

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