The risk of false-positive results in orthopaedic surgical trials.
The risk of concluding that the results of a particular study are true, when, in fact, they really are attributable to chance (or random sampling error) is underappreciated by investigators. This erroneous false-positive conclusion is designated as a Type I or alpha error. The extent to which random...
| Publicado en: | Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research® Vol. 413; pp. 63 - 70 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , , |
| Formato: | research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2003 Aug
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=106724245&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 106724245 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 0009921X 23N jtl: Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research® issn: 0009921X maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: 2003 Aug vid: 413 pid: 433 pub: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins place: Baltimore, Maryland artinfo: ui: 106724245 106724245 2004057094 NLM12897597 106724245 ppf: 63 ppct: 7 formats: tig: atl: The risk of false-positive results in orthopaedic surgical trials. aug: au: Bhandari M Whang W Kuo JC Devereaux PJ Sprague S Tornetta P III affil: McMaster University Medical Center, Dept of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, 1200 Main St West, Room 2C3, Hamilton, Ontario, L8N 3Z5, Canada; bhandari@sympatico.ca sug: subj: Orthopedic Surgery Serial Publications Clinical Trials Type I Error Human ab: The risk of concluding that the results of a particular study are true, when, in fact, they really are attributable to chance (or random sampling error) is underappreciated by investigators. This erroneous false-positive conclusion is designated as a Type I or alpha error. The extent to which randomized trials in surgery risk Type I errors is unclear. The current authors hand-searched four orthopaedic journals, six general surgery journals, and five medical journals to identify recently published randomized trials (within the past 2 years). Information on outcomes and statistical adjustment for multiple outcomes was recorded for each study. The risk of a Type I error was calculated for each study that did not explicitly state a primary outcome measure for the main statistical comparison. One hundred fifty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria for the study: 60 studies from orthopaedic journals, 49 studies from nonorthopaedic surgical journals, and 50 studies from medical journals. Of the trials that did not state a primary outcome measure, the risk of Type I errors (false-positive results) in orthopaedic and nonorthopaedic surgery journals (mean 37.3% +/- 13.3% and 37.6% +/- 10.5%, respectively) were significantly greater than medical journals (10.1% +/- 1.9%). In the current review of randomized trials in surgery and medicine, the following is reported: (1) reporting of primary outcomes in trials was inadequate; (2) one in three trials in surgery and one in 10 trials in medicine risked false-positive results; and (3) few trials in surgery and medicine considered adjustment for multiple comparisons. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|