Literature DB >> 29699105

Usefulness of statistics for establishing evidence-based reproductive medicine.

Yasunori Sato1,2, Masahiko Gosho3, Kiyotaka Toshimori4.   

Abstract

During the last decade, evidence-based medicine has been described as a paradigm shift in clinical practice, and as "the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients". Appropriate statistical methods for analyzing data are critical for the correct interpretation of the results in proof of the evidence. However, in the medical literature, these statistical methods are often incorrectly interpreted or misinterpreted, leading to serious methodological errors and misinterpretations. This review highlights several important aspects related to the design and statistical analysis for evidence-based reproductive medicine. First, we clarify the distinction between ratios, proportions, and rates, and then provide a definition of pregnancy rate. Second, we focus on a special type of bias called 'confounding bias', which occurs when a factor is associated with both the exposure and the disease but is not part of the causal pathway. Finally, we present concerns regarding misuse of statistical software or application of inappropriate statistical methods, especially in medical research.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biostatistical methods; Confounding factor; Evidence‐based reproductive medicine; Exploratory data analysis; Pregnancy rate

Year:  2011        PMID: 29699105      PMCID: PMC5906827          DOI: 10.1007/s12522-011-0106-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Reprod Med Biol        ISSN: 1445-5781


  44 in total

Review 1.  Statistics in medical journals: some recent trends.

Authors:  D G Altman
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2000-12-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Research publications in vascular and interventional radiology: research topics, study designs, and statistical methods.

Authors:  Wilmer Huang; Jeanne M LaBerge; Ying Lu; David V Glidden
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Radiol       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 3.464

3.  Statistical methods in the journal.

Authors:  Nicholas J Horton; Suzanne S Switzer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-11-03       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Higher rate of stillbirth at the extremes of reproductive age: a large nationwide sample of deliveries in the United States.

Authors:  Brian T Bateman; Lynn L Simpson
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 8.661

5.  Use of statistical analysis in the AJR and Radiology: frequency, methods, and subspecialty differences.

Authors:  A D Elster
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Statistical methods in rehabilitation research.

Authors:  S F Wainapel; H L Kayne
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1985-05       Impact factor: 3.966

7.  Statistical methods in anesthesia articles: an evaluation of two American journals during two six-month periods.

Authors:  M J Avram; C A Shanks; M H Dykes; A K Ronai; W M Stiers
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  1985-06       Impact factor: 5.108

8.  Difficult or repeated sequential embryo transfers do not adversely affect in-vitro fertilization pregnancy rates or outcome.

Authors:  I Tur-Kaspa; Y Yuval; D Bider; J Levron; A Shulman; J Dor
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 6.918

Review 9.  Fertility and abortion rates in the United States, 1960-2002.

Authors:  Brady E Hamilton; Stephanie J Ventura
Journal:  Int J Androl       Date:  2006-02

Review 10.  Statistical errors in medical research - a review of common pitfalls.

Authors:  Alexander M Strasak; Qamruz Zaman; Karl P Pfeiffer; Georg Göbel; Hanno Ulmer
Journal:  Swiss Med Wkly       Date:  2007-01-27       Impact factor: 2.193

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.