简要统计:术后事件负担的评估措施。

C. DeFrancesco, B. Striano, K. Baldwin
{"title":"简要统计:术后事件负担的评估措施。","authors":"C. DeFrancesco, B. Striano, K. Baldwin","doi":"10.1097/CORR.0000000000000960","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An estimation of postoperative event rates and survivorship after surgical interventions can be an important part of the informed consent process. However, biased methodology can yield misleading measures of the event burden. Surgeons must critically evaluate reported rates and understand common pitfalls to provide better patient counseling. However, because the methods used in clinical research may be confusing and intimidating, many doctors have difficulty doing so. To try to demystify this important topic, we will discuss alternative approaches to evaluating survivorship and the burden of events by using a hypothetical patient sample to illustrate available methods (Fig. 1A). All figures here use the same patient sample; their visual dissimilarity highlights how different methods handle sample data differently. We also cite real-world studies on ACL reconstruction to show the relative strengths and weaknesses of each technique.","PeriodicalId":10465,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research","volume":"128 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Statistics in Brief: Evaluating Measures of the Postoperative Event Burden.\",\"authors\":\"C. DeFrancesco, B. Striano, K. Baldwin\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/CORR.0000000000000960\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"An estimation of postoperative event rates and survivorship after surgical interventions can be an important part of the informed consent process. However, biased methodology can yield misleading measures of the event burden. Surgeons must critically evaluate reported rates and understand common pitfalls to provide better patient counseling. However, because the methods used in clinical research may be confusing and intimidating, many doctors have difficulty doing so. To try to demystify this important topic, we will discuss alternative approaches to evaluating survivorship and the burden of events by using a hypothetical patient sample to illustrate available methods (Fig. 1A). All figures here use the same patient sample; their visual dissimilarity highlights how different methods handle sample data differently. We also cite real-world studies on ACL reconstruction to show the relative strengths and weaknesses of each technique.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10465,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research\",\"volume\":\"128 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000000960\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000000960","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

手术干预后的术后事件率和生存率的估计可以是知情同意过程的重要组成部分。然而,有偏见的方法可能产生对事件负担的误导性测量。外科医生必须批判性地评估报告的发病率,并了解常见的陷阱,以提供更好的患者咨询。然而,由于临床研究中使用的方法可能令人困惑和恐惧,许多医生很难做到这一点。为了试图揭开这个重要话题的神秘面纱,我们将通过使用一个假设的患者样本来说明可用的方法,讨论评估生存率和事件负担的替代方法(图1A)。这里的所有数据都使用相同的患者样本;它们在视觉上的不同凸显了不同方法处理样本数据的不同。我们还引用了真实世界的ACL重建研究,以显示每种技术的相对优势和劣势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Statistics in Brief: Evaluating Measures of the Postoperative Event Burden.
An estimation of postoperative event rates and survivorship after surgical interventions can be an important part of the informed consent process. However, biased methodology can yield misleading measures of the event burden. Surgeons must critically evaluate reported rates and understand common pitfalls to provide better patient counseling. However, because the methods used in clinical research may be confusing and intimidating, many doctors have difficulty doing so. To try to demystify this important topic, we will discuss alternative approaches to evaluating survivorship and the burden of events by using a hypothetical patient sample to illustrate available methods (Fig. 1A). All figures here use the same patient sample; their visual dissimilarity highlights how different methods handle sample data differently. We also cite real-world studies on ACL reconstruction to show the relative strengths and weaknesses of each technique.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
CORR Insights®: What is the Geographic Distribution of Women Orthopaedic Surgeons Throughout the United States? What Are the Rates and Trends of Women Authors in Three High-Impact Orthopaedic Journals from 2006-2017? CORR Insights®: Chair Versus Chairman: Does Orthopaedics Use the Gendered Term More Than Other Specialties? CORR Insights®: Does the Proportion of Women in Orthopaedic Leadership Roles Reflect the Gender Composition of Specialty Societies? Women Are at Higher Risk for Concussions Due to Ball or Equipment Contact in Soccer and Lacrosse.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1