...
首页> 外文期刊>British Journal of Radiology >The choice and definition of summary measure for meta-analysis of clinical studies with binary outcomes: effect on chnical interpretation.
【24h】

The choice and definition of summary measure for meta-analysis of clinical studies with binary outcomes: effect on chnical interpretation.

机译:二元成果临床研究鉴定综述措施的选择及定义:对Chnical解释的影响。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Many systematic reviews and meta-analyses concern the effect of a healthcare intervention on a binary outcome i.e. occurrence (or not) of a particular event. Usually, the overall effect, pooled across all studies included in the meta-analysis, is summarised using the odds ratio (OR) or the relative risk (RR). Under most circumstances, it is obvious how to identify what should be considered as the event of interest-for example, death or a clinically important side-effect. However, on occasion it may not be clear in which "direction" the event should be specified-such as attendance (vs non-attendance) at cancer screening. Usually, this choice is not critical to the overall conclusion of the meta-analysis, but occasionally it can lead to differences in how the included studies are pooled, ultimately affecting the overall meta-analytic result, particularly when using RRs rather than ORs. In this commentary, we will explain this phenomenon in more detail using examples from the literature, and explore how analysts and readers can avoid some potential pitfalls.
机译:许多系统的评价和荟萃分析涉及医疗保健干预对二元成果的影响,即特定事件的发生(或不)。通常,在Meta分析中包含的所有研究中汇集的总体效果总结了使用赔率比(或)或相对风险(RR)来概述。在大多数情况下,很明显如何确定应该被视为感兴趣的事件 - 例如,死亡或临床重要的副作用。然而,有时可能不明确,其中应该指定事件的“方向” - 例如在癌症筛查中的出席(与出席者)。通常,这种选择对Meta分析的整体结论并不重要,但偶尔会导致汇集所包含的研究的差异,最终影响整体荟萃分析结果,特别是在使用RRS而不是或者时。在这方面,我们将使用文献中的例子更详细地解释这种现象,并探索分析师和读者如何避免一些潜在的陷阱。

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