Branching processes, the max-plus algebra and network calculus

Branching processes can describe the dynamics of various queueing systems, peer-to-peer systems, delay tolerant networks, etc. In this paper we study the basic stochastic recursion of multitype branching processes, but in two non-standard contexts. First, we consider this recursion in the max-plus algebra where branching corresponds to finding the maximal offspring of the current generation. Secondly, we consider network-calculus-type deterministic bounds as introduced by Cruz, which we extend to handle branching-type processes. The paper provides both qualitative and quantitative results and introduces various applications of (max-plus) branching processes in queueing theory

Scoping review on interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research

Objectives The goal of this study is to identify, analyse and classify interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in order to obtain a wide picture of how the problem of enhancing the completeness of reporting of biomedical literature has been tackled so far. Design Scoping review. Search strategy We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases and conducted a grey literature search for (1) studies evaluating interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research and (2) other types of references describing interventions that have been performed or suggested but never evaluated. The characteristics and effect of the evaluated interventions were analysed. Moreover, we explored the rationale of the interventions identified and determined the existing gaps in research on the evaluation of interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines. Results 109 references containing 31 interventions (11 evaluated) were included. These were grouped into five categories: (1) training on the use of reporting guidelines, (2) improving understanding, (3) encouraging adherence, (4) checking adherence and providing feedback, and (5) involvement of experts. Additionally, we identified lack of evaluated interventions (1) on training on the use of reporting guidelines and improving their understanding, (2) at early stages of research and (3) after the final acceptance of the manuscript. Conclusions This scoping review identified a wide range of strategies to improve adherence to reporting guidelines that can be taken by different stakeholders. Additional research is needed to assess the effectiveness of many of these interventionsPeer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

The efficacy of problem-solving treatments after deliberate self-harm: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with respect to depression, hopelessness and improvement in problems

Background. Brief problem-solving therapy is regarded as a pragmatic treatment for deliberate self-harm (DSH) patients. A recent meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating this approach indicated a trend towards reduced repetition of DSH but the pooled odds ratio was not statistically significant. We have now examined other important outcomes using this procedure, namely depression, hopelessness and improvement in problems. Method. Six trials in which problem-solving therapy was compared with control treatment were identified from an extensive literature review of RCTs of treatments for DSH patients. Data concerning depression, hopelessness and improvement in problems were extracted. Where relevant statistical data (e.g. standard deviations) were missing these were imputed using various statistical methods. Results were pooled using meta-analytical procedures. Results. At follow-up, patients who were offered problem-solving therapy had significantly greater improvement in scores for depression (standardized mean difference =[minus sign]0·36; 95% CI [minus sign]0·61 to [minus sign]0·11) and hopelessness (weighted mean difference =[minus sign]3·2; 95% CI [minus sign]4·0 to [minus sign]2·41), and significantly more reported improvement in their problems (odds ratio = 2·31; 95% CI 1·29 to 4·13), than patients who were in the control treatment groups. Conclusions. Problem-solving therapy for DSH patients appears to produce better results than control treatment with regard to improvement in depression, hopelessness and problems. It is desirable that this finding is confirmed in a large trial, which will also allow adequate testing of the impact of this treatment on repetition of DSH

Revised standards for reporting interventions in clinical trials of acupuncture (STRICTA) : Extending the CONSORT statement

The Standards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) were published in five journals in 2001 and 2002. These guidelines, in the form of a checklist and explanations for use by authors and journal editors, were designed to improve reporting of acupuncture trials, particularly the interventions, thereby facilitating their interpretation and replication. Subsequent reviews of the application and impact of STRICTA have highlighted the value of STRICTA as well as scope for improvements and revision

Bland-Altman methods for comparing methods of measurement and response to criticisms

Introduced in 1983, Bland-Altman methods is now considered the standard approach for assessment of agreement between two methods of measurement. The method is widely used by researchers in various disciplines so that the Bland-Altman 1986 Lancet paper has been named as the 29th mostly highly cited paper ever, over all fields. However, two papers by Hopkins (2004) and Krouwer (2007) questioned the validity of the Bland-Altman analysis. We review the points of critical papers and provide responses to them. The discussions in the critical papers of the Bland-Altman method are scientifically delusive. Hopkins misused the Bland-Altman methodology for research question of model validation and also incorrectly used least-square regression when there is measurement error in the predictor. The problem with Krouwers' paper is making sweeping generalisation of a very narrow and somewhat unrealistic situation. The method proposed by Bland and Altman should be used when the research question is method comparison. © 202

Completeness of reporting of case reports in high-impact medical journals

Introduction: Case reports represent a relevant, timely and important study design in advancing medical scientific knowledge. They allow integration between clinical practice and clinical epidemiology. We aimed to assess the completeness of reporting (COR) of case reports published in high-impact journals. We assessed the COR of case reports using the CARE guidelines. Materials and methods: We selected three high-impact journals and one journal specialized in publishing case reports, in which we included all published case reports from July to December 2017. Median COR score was calculated per study, and CORs were compared between journals with and without endorsement of CARE guidelines. Results: One hundred and fourteen case reports were included. Overall median COR was 81%, IQR [63%-96%]. Sections with the highest COR (84%-100%) were patient information, clinical findings, therapeutic intervention, follow-up and outcomes, discussion and informed consent. Sections with the lowest COR were title, keywords, timeline and patient perspective (2%-34%). COR was higher in journals endorsing in comparison to those not endorsing CARE guidelines (77% vs 65%), respectively, median difference = −12% 95% CI [−16% to −7%]. Discussion: Overall completeness of case reports in included journals is high especially for CARE endorsing and dedicated journals but reporting of some items could be improved. Ongoing and future evaluations of endorsement status of reporting guidelines in medical journals should be assessed to improve completeness and reduce waste of clinical research, including case reports

CHecklist for statistical Assessment of Medical Papers: the CHAMP statement

Misuse of statistics in medical and sports science research is common and may lead to detrimental consequences to healthcare. Many authors, editors and peer reviewers of medical papers will not have expert knowledge of statistics or may be unconvinced about the importance of applying correct statistics in medical research. Although there are guidelines on reporting statistics in medical papers, a checklist on the more general and commonly seen aspects of statistics to assess when peer-reviewing an article is needed. In this article, we propose a CHecklist for statistical Assessment of Medical Papers (CHAMP) comprising 30 items related to the design and conduct, data analysis, reporting and presentation, and interpretation of a research paper. While CHAMP is primarily aimed at editors and peer reviewers during the statistical assessment of a medical paper, we believe it will serve as a useful reference to improve authors’ and readers’ practice in their use of statistics in medical research. We strongly encourage editors and peer reviewers to consult CHAMP when assessing manuscripts for potential publication. Authors also may apply CHAMP to ensure the validity of their statistical approach and reporting of medical research, and readers may consider using CHAMP to enhance their statistical assessment of a paper