Literature DB >> 28454999

Research Pearls: The Significance of Statistics and Perils of Pooling. Part 1: Clinical Versus Statistical Significance.

Joshua D Harris1, Jefferson C Brand2, Mark P Cote3, Scott C Faucett4, Aman Dhawan5.   

Abstract

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly being used in today's rapidly evolving health care environment. The value of care provision emphasizes the highest quality of care at the lowest cost. Quality is in the eye of the beholder, with different stakeholders prioritizing different components of the value equation. At the center of the discussion are the patients and their quantification of outcome via PROs. There are hundreds of different PRO questionnaires that may ascertain an individual's overall general health, quality of life, activity level, or determine a body part-, joint-, or disease-specific outcome. As providers and patients increasingly measure outcomes, there exists greater potential to identify significant differences across time points due to an intervention. In other words, if you compare groups enough, you are bound to eventually detect a significant difference. However, the characterization of significance is not purely dichotomous, as a statistically significant outcome may not be clinically relevant. Statistical significance is the direct result of a mathematical equation, irrelevant to the patient experience. In clinical research, despite detecting statistically significant pre- and post-treatment differences, patients may or may not be able to perceive those differences. Thresholds exist to delineate whether those differences are clinically important or relevant to patients. PROs are unique, with distinct parameters of clinical importance for each outcome score. This review highlights the most common PROs in clinical research and discusses the salient pearls and pitfalls. In particular, it stresses the difference between statistical and clinical relevance and the concepts of minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptom state. Researchers and clinicians should consider clinical importance in addition to statistical significance when interpreting and reporting investigation results.
Copyright © 2017 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28454999     DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2017.01.053

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arthroscopy        ISSN: 0749-8063            Impact factor:   4.772


  64 in total

1.  The morphology of the tibial footprint of the anterior cruciate ligament changes with ageing from oval/elliptical to C-shaped.

Authors:  Rodolfo Morales-Avalos; Tadeo A Castillo-Escobedo; Rodrigo E Elizondo-Omaña; María Del Carmen Theriot-Giron; Simone Perelli; Santos Guzmán-López; Víctor M Peña-Martínez; Félix Vílchez-Cavazos; Juan Carlos Monllau
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2020-05-08       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Hip arthroscopy with initial access to the peripheral compartment provides significant improvement in FAI patients.

Authors:  Pedro Dantas; Sérgio Gonçalves; Vasco Mascarenhas; Antonio Camporese; Oliver Marin-Peña
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-01-02       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 3.  Efficacy and safety of the combination of glucosamine and chondroitin for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zhengyuan Meng; Jiakun Liu; Nan Zhou
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 3.067

4.  Lateral extraarticular tenodesis improves stability in non-anatomic ACL reconstructed knees: in vivo kinematic analysis.

Authors:  Simone Perelli; Rodolfo Morales-Avalos; Mario Formagnana; Gonzalo Rojas-Castillo; Gil Serrancolí; Juan Carlos Monllau
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2022-01-29       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Displaced three and four part proximal humeral fractures: prospective controlled randomized open-label two-arm study comparing intramedullary nailing and locking plate.

Authors:  Patrick Boyer; Camille Couffignal; Mohammad Bahman; Guy Mylle; Marc-Antoine Rousseau; Ruben Dukan
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2021-09-23       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Remnant preserving ACL reconstruction with a functional remnant is related to improved laxity but not to improved clinical outcomes in comparison to a nonfunctional remnant.

Authors:  Carlos Eduardo Franciozi; Flávio Kazuo Minami; Luiz Felipe Ambra; Pedro Henrique Schmidt Alves Ferreira Galvão; Felipe Conrado Schumacher; Marcelo Seiji Kubota
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-04-24       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  CORR Insights®: Does Cup Position at the High Hip Center or Anatomic Hip Center in THA for Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip Result in Better Harris Hip Scores and Revision Incidence? A Systematic Review.

Authors:  David R Maldonado
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-05-01       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Improved Short-Term Outcomes of Osteochondral Lesions of the Knee Following Arthroscopic Treatment With Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate and Cartilage-Derived Matrix.

Authors:  Iciar M Dávila Castrodad; Erica S Simone; Jennifer Kurowicki; Justin X Melendez; Samuel J Mease; Vincent K McInerney; Anthony J Scillia
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-02-24

9.  Hamstring Autograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using an All-Inside Technique With and Without Independent Suture Tape Reinforcement.

Authors:  Chad W Parkes; Devin P Leland; Bruce A Levy; Michael J Stuart; Christopher L Camp; Daniel B F Saris; Aaron J Krych
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2020-11-02       Impact factor: 4.772

10.  Coracoclavicular Space Widening on Radiographs After Arthroscopic Stabilization With Suspensory Fixation Does Not Affect Athletic Performance.

Authors:  Amr Ibrahim; Saleh Gameel; Tarek Mohamed Ghandour; Begad M Samy Abbas
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-03-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.