...
首页> 外文期刊>Statistics & Probability Letters >Statistical testing alone and estimation plus testing: Reporting study outcomes in biomedical journals
【24h】

Statistical testing alone and estimation plus testing: Reporting study outcomes in biomedical journals

机译:单独进行统计测试,然后进行评估和测试:在生物医学期刊中报告研究结果

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background: The outcomes of a research investigation are presented as statistically significant or not statistically significant, or testing alone, including the reporting of p-values. This information conveys the statistical outcomes, or statistical findings, in response to the hypotheses of interest. A companion issue is the results of the estimation plus testing, clinical or practical significance, or the findings for the hypotheses of interest. Estimation plus testing, clinical or practical significance, findings provide information as to the strength of the finding, the differences that were detected between treatment groups, or other such conclusions. Objectives: Effect sizes are recommended as a measure of estimation plus testing, clinical significance, since they are generalizable and invariant. A case is made for the reporting of estimation plus testing for outcomes in biomedical journals. Design: A review of recent publications reporting effect sizes as well as a review of publication polices for biomedical journals are discussed. Results: Of the It 3 articles in 38 medical journals that mentioned effect size, 35% were meta-analyses or systematic reviews. Of the original research reported, 12% reporting effect size were randomized control trials, 54% were descriptive or observational studies. Six of the 16 Public Health/Epidemiology journals contained effect size statistics in 24 articles. Studies reporting meta-analyses accounted for 17% of the total number of Public Health/Epidemiology articles reviewed. Of the 38 medical journals and 16 Public Health/Epidemiology journals reviewed, the "Instructions for Authors" were typically stylistic in nature. Conclusions: When a criterion for testing alone, namely statistical significance, is met and a criterion for estimation plus testing, namely clinical significance is met, then a conclusion of effectiveness may be reached. For a complete interpretation of research results, the authors strongly encourage the reporting of estimation plus testing.
机译:背景:研究调查的结果显示为具有统计意义或不具有统计意义,或者单独进行测试,包括报告p值。该信息根据感兴趣的假设传达统计结果或统计结果。伴随的问题是估计结果加上测试,临床或实践意义或感兴趣假设的发现。估计加上测试,临床或实际意义,发现可提供有关发现强度,治疗组之间检测到的差异或其他此类结论的信息。目的:推荐效应量作为评估和检验,临床意义的量度,因为它们是可概括的且不变的。在生物医学期刊中报告评估和检验结果的案例。设计:讨论了对影响效果大小的最新出版物的评论以及对生物医学期刊的出版物政策的评论。结果:在38篇医学期刊的It 3篇文章中提到效应大小,其中35%为荟萃分析或系统评价。在最初报告的研究中,有12%的报告效应量是随机对照试验,有54%是描述性或观察性研究。 16种公共卫生/流行病学杂志中的6种包含24种文章的效应量统计。报告荟萃分析的研究占所审查的公共卫生/流行病学文章总数的17%。在所审查的38种医学期刊和16种公共卫生/流行病学期刊中,“作者须知”通常具有风格。结论:如果满足单独测试的标准(即统计学显着性)并且满足评估加测试的标准(即临床显着性),则可以得出有效性结论。为了对研究结果有完整的解释,作者强烈建议报告评估和检验。

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