Bias and Conditioning in Sequential Medical Trials.

Randomized controlled trials are currently the gold standard within evidence-based medicine. Usually they are monitored for early signs of effectiveness or harm. However, evidence from trials stopped early is often charged with bias toward implausibly large effects. To our mind, this skeptical attit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Philosophy of Science Vol. 80; no. 5; pp. 1053 - 1065
Autores principales: Nardini, Cecilia, Sprenger, Jan
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Cambridge University Press Dec2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=93642180&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 93642180
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00318248
        PSC
      jtl: Philosophy of Science
      issn: 00318248
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Dec2013
      vid: 80
      iid: 5
      pid: 15979
      pub: Cambridge University Press
    artinfo:
      ui:
        93642180
        10.1086/673732
      ppf: 1053
      ppct: 12
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 152KB
      tig:
        atl: Bias and Conditioning in Sequential Medical Trials.
      aug:
        au:
          Nardini, Cecilia
          Sprenger, Jan
      su:
        Randomized controlled trials
        Evidence-based medicine
        Research bias
        Frequentist statistics
        Clinical trials
      sug:
        subj:
          Randomized controlled trials
          Evidence-based medicine
          Research bias
          Frequentist statistics
          Clinical trials
      ab: Randomized controlled trials are currently the gold standard within evidence-based medicine. Usually they are monitored for early signs of effectiveness or harm. However, evidence from trials stopped early is often charged with bias toward implausibly large effects. To our mind, this skeptical attitude is unfounded and caused by the failure to perform appropriate conditioning in the statistical analysis of the evidence. We contend that conditional hypothesis tests give a superior appreciation of the obtained evidence and significantly improve the practice of sequential medical trials, while staying firmly rooted in frequentist methodology.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Philosophy of Science is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Philosophy of Science
      holder: Cambridge University Press
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2013
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N