860 research outputs found
Quality research in healthcare: are researchers getting enough statistical support?
BACKGROUND: Reviews of peer-reviewed health studies have highlighted problems with their methodological quality. As published health studies form the basis of many clinical decisions including evaluation and provisions of health services, this has scientific and ethical implications. The lack of involvement of methodologists (defined as statisticians or quantitative epidemiologists) has been suggested as one key reason for this problem and this has been linked to the lack of access to methodologists. This issue was highlighted several years ago and it was suggested that more investments were needed from health care organisations and Universities to alleviate this problem. METHODS: To assess the current level of methodological support available for health researchers in England, we surveyed the 25 National Health Services Trusts in England, that are the major recipients of the Department of Health's research and development (R&D) support funding. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The survey shows that the earmarking of resources to provide appropriate methodological support to health researchers in these organisations is not widespread. Neither the level of R&D support funding received nor the volume of research undertaken by these organisations showed any association with the amount they spent in providing a central resource for methodological support for their researchers. CONCLUSION: The promotion and delivery of high quality health research requires that organisations hosting health research and their academic partners put in place funding and systems to provide appropriate methodological support to ensure valid research findings. If resources are limited, health researchers may have to rely on short courses and/or a limited number of advisory sessions which may not always produce satisfactory results
Survey of the quality of experimental design, statistical analysis and reporting of research using animals
For scientific, ethical and economic reasons, experiments involving animals should be appropriately designed, correctly analysed and transparently reported. This increases the scientific validity of the results, and maximises the knowledge gained from each experiment. A minimum amount of relevant information must be included in scientific publications to ensure that the methods and results of a study can be reviewed, analysed and repeated. Omitting essential information can raise scientific and ethical concerns. We report the findings of a systematic survey of reporting, experimental design and statistical analysis in published biomedical research using laboratory animals. Medline and EMBASE were searched for studies reporting research on live rats, mice and non-human primates carried out in UK and US publicly funded research establishments. Detailed information was collected from 271 publications, about the objective or hypothesis of the study, the number, sex, age and/or weight of animals used, and experimental and statistical methods. Only 59% of the studies stated the hypothesis or objective of the study and the number and characteristics of the animals used. Appropriate and efficient experimental design is a critical component of high-quality science. Most of the papers surveyed did not use randomisation (87%) or blinding (86%), to reduce bias in animal selection and outcome assessment. Only 70% of the publications that used statistical methods described their methods and presented the results with a measure of error or variability. This survey has identified a number of issues that need to be addressed in order to improve experimental design and reporting in publications describing research using animals. Scientific publication is a powerful and important source of information; the authors of scientific publications therefore have a responsibility to describe their methods and results comprehensively, accurately and transparently, and peer reviewers and journal editors share the responsibility to ensure that published studies fulfil these criteria
An investigation of minimisation criteria
Minimisation can be used within treatment trials to ensure that prognostic factors are evenly distributed between treatment groups. The technique is relatively straightforward to apply but does require running tallies of patient recruitments to be made and some simple calculations to be performed prior to each allocation. As computing facilities have become more widely available, minimisation has become a more feasible option for many. Although the technique has increased in popularity, the mode of application is often poorly reported and the choice of input parameters not justified in any logical way
The Absolute of Advaita and the Spirit of Hegel: Situating Vedānta on the Horizons of British Idealisms
A significant volume of philosophical literature produced by Indian academic philosophers in the first half of the twentieth century can be placed under the rubric of ‘Śaṁkara and X’, where X is Hegel, or a German or a British philosopher who had commented on, elaborated or critiqued the Hegelian system. We will explore in this essay the philosophical significance of Hegel-influenced systems as an intellectual conduit for these Indo-European conceptual encounters, and highlight how for some Indian philosophers the British variations on Hegelian systems were both a point of entry into debates over ‘idealism’ and ‘realism’ in contemporary European philosophy and an occasion for defending Advaita against the charge of propounding a doctrine of world illusionism.
Our study of the philosophical enquiries of A.C. Mukerji, P.T. Raju, and S.N.L. Shrivastava indicates that they developed distinctive styles of engaging with Hegelian idealisms as they reconfigured certain aspects of the classical Advaita of Śaṁkara through contemporary vocabulary.
These appropriations of Hegelian idioms can be placed under three overlapping styles: (a) Mukerji was partly involved in locating Advaita in an intermediate conceptual space between, on the one hand, Kantian agnosticism and, on the other hand, Hegelian absolutism; (b) Raju and Shrivastava presented Advaitic thought as the fulfilment of certain insights of Hegel and F.H. Bradley; and (c) the interrogations of Hegel’s ‘idealism’ provided several Indian academic philosophers with a hermeneutic opportunity to revisit the vexed question of whether the ‘idealism’ of Śaṁkara reduces the phenomenal world, structured by , to a bundle of ideas
Conservative management of a grade V injury to an ectopic pelvic kidney following blunt trauma to the lower abdomen: a case report
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>Ectopic pelvic kidneys represent an anatomic variant that remains clinically asymptomatic in most patients. While there is some literature to suggest that ectopic kidneys may be more predisposed to blunt trauma injuries, there are few examples to guide the management of these injuries. To our knowledge, we present the first case of a grade V renal injury to an ectopic pelvic kidney managed successfully with conservative measures.</p> <p>Case Presentation</p> <p>We present a case of grade V renal injury to an ectopic pelvic kidney in a 21 year-old African-American male. The clinical and radiographic findings are presented, along with the patient's conservative hospital course.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We suggest that management of grade V renal injuries to ectopic pelvic kidneys can be treated similarly to that of kidneys in normal anatomic position. Conservative measures may be considered in properly selected patients.</p
Combining estimates of interest in prognostic modelling studies after multiple imputation: current practice and guidelines
Background: Multiple imputation (MI) provides an effective approach to handle missing covariate
data within prognostic modelling studies, as it can properly account for the missing data
uncertainty. The multiply imputed datasets are each analysed using standard prognostic modelling
techniques to obtain the estimates of interest. The estimates from each imputed dataset are then
combined into one overall estimate and variance, incorporating both the within and between
imputation variability. Rubin's rules for combining these multiply imputed estimates are based on
asymptotic theory. The resulting combined estimates may be more accurate if the posterior
distribution of the population parameter of interest is better approximated by the normal
distribution. However, the normality assumption may not be appropriate for all the parameters of
interest when analysing prognostic modelling studies, such as predicted survival probabilities and
model performance measures.
Methods: Guidelines for combining the estimates of interest when analysing prognostic modelling
studies are provided. A literature review is performed to identify current practice for combining
such estimates in prognostic modelling studies.
Results: Methods for combining all reported estimates after MI were not well reported in the
current literature. Rubin's rules without applying any transformations were the standard approach
used, when any method was stated.
Conclusion: The proposed simple guidelines for combining estimates after MI may lead to a wider
and more appropriate use of MI in future prognostic modelling studies
Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines
David Moher and colleagues from the EQUATOR network offer guidance and recommended steps for developing health research reporting guidelines
Parametric methods outperformed non-parametric methods in comparisons of discrete numerical variables
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The number of events per individual is a widely reported variable in medical research papers. Such variables are the most common representation of the general variable type called discrete numerical. There is currently no consensus on how to compare and present such variables, and recommendations are lacking. The objective of this paper is to present recommendations for analysis and presentation of results for discrete numerical variables.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Two simulation studies were used to investigate the performance of hypothesis tests and confidence interval methods for variables with outcomes {0, 1, 2}, {0, 1, 2, 3}, {0, 1, 2, 3, 4}, and {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5}, using the difference between the means as an effect measure.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The Welch U test (the T test with adjustment for unequal variances) and its associated confidence interval performed well for almost all situations considered. The Brunner-Munzel test also performed well, except for small sample sizes (10 in each group). The ordinary T test, the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test, the percentile bootstrap interval, and the bootstrap-<it>t </it>interval did not perform satisfactorily.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The difference between the means is an appropriate effect measure for comparing two independent discrete numerical variables that has both lower and upper bounds. To analyze this problem, we encourage more frequent use of parametric hypothesis tests and confidence intervals.</p
Helping editors, peer reviewers and authors improve the clarity, completeness and transparency of reporting health research
Inadequate reporting is problematic for several reasons. If authors do not provide sufficient details concerning the conduct of their study, readers are left with an incomplete picture of what was done. As such, they are not able to judge the merits of the results and interpret them. The EQUATOR Network is a new initiative aimed at improving the clarity and transparency of reporting health research
- …