How to assess an abstract

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Basic statistics.
Advertisements

How to assess an abstract
PP (Study Design) for 2nd Year
Critical Appraisal: Epidemiology 101 POS Lecture Series April 28, 2004.
Reporting drugs and treatments Thomas Abraham. What we will learn today The difference between absolute and relative risk reduction A basic way to interpret.
Reading the Dental Literature
CRITICAL APPRAISAL Dr. Cristina Ana Stoian Resident Journal Club
Interpreting Basic Statistics
Statistics By Z S Chaudry. Why do I need to know about statistics ? Tested in AKT To understand Journal articles and research papers.
Statistics for Health Care
The Bahrain Branch of the UK Cochrane Centre In Collaboration with Reyada Training & Management Consultancy, Dubai-UAE Cochrane Collaboration and Systematic.
Are the results valid? Was the validity of the included studies appraised?
Absolute, Relative and Attributable Risks. Outcomes or differences that we are interested in:  Differences in means or proportions  Odds ratio (OR)
 Mean: true average  Median: middle number once ranked  Mode: most repetitive  Range : difference between largest and smallest.
EBD for Dental Staff Seminar 2: Core Critical Appraisal Dominic Hurst evidenced.qm.
Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Chapter 14 Screening and Prevention of Illnesses and Injuries: Research Methods.
Study design P.Olliaro Nov04. Study designs: observational vs. experimental studies What happened?  Case-control study What’s happening?  Cross-sectional.
EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE Effectiveness of therapy Ross Lawrenson.
Critiquing for Evidence-based Practice: Therapy or Prevention M8120 Columbia University Suzanne Bakken, RN, DNSc.
Statistics 101. Why statistics ? To understand studies in clinical journals. To design and analyze clinical research studies. To be better able to explain.
Understanding real research 4. Randomised controlled trials.
Statistics. Statistics = everything you need to know, but continually want to forget!!!!
EBCP. Random vs Systemic error Random error: errors in measurement that lead to measured values being inconsistent when repeated measures are taken. Ie:
CRITICAL READING ST HELIER VTS 2008 RCGP Curriculum Core Statement Domain 3 AS.
Stats Facts Mark Halloran. Diagnostic Stats Disease present Disease absent TOTALS Test positive aba+b Test negative cdc+d TOTALSa+cb+da+b+c+d.
Statistics for the board September 14 th 2007 Jean-Sebastien Rachoin MD.
A Simple Method for Evaluating the Clinical Literature “PP-ICONS” approach Based on Robert J. Flaherty - Family Practice Management – 5/2004.
Compliance Original Study Design Randomised Surgical care Medical care.
EVALUATING u After retrieving the literature, you have to evaluate or critically appraise the evidence for its validity and applicability to your patient.
Vanderbilt Sports Medicine Evidence-Base Medicine How to Practice and Teach EBM Chapter 5 : Therapy.
Silaja Cheruvu, R3.  What’s the BEST way to prevent diabetes in high risk patients?  By doing nothing?  With lifestyle changes?  With medication?
Biostatistics Board Review Parul Chaudhri, DO Family Medicine Faculty Development Fellow, UPMC St Margaret March 5, 2016.
What are the Chances Dr? Nick Pendleton. Can I have a Prostate Check? ?
2 3 انواع مطالعات توصيفي (Descriptive) تحليلي (Analytic) مداخله اي (Interventional) مشاهده اي ( Observational ) كارآزمايي باليني كارآزمايي اجتماعي كارآزمايي.
Methods and Statistical analysis. A brief presentation. Markos Kashiouris, M.D.
“Reading and commenting papers” (Scientific English) Alexis Descatha INSERM, UMS UVSQ- Unité de pathologie professionnelle, Garches.
GP ST2 Group, 28/9/11 Tom Gamble
…it’s really interesting
HelpDesk Answers Synthesizing the Evidence
EPID 503 – Class 12 Cohort Study Design.
Sample size calculation
An Idiots Guide to Statistics Curriculum 3.6
Question 1 A new ‘Super test’ claims to have a superb capability to diagnose disease X. Its sensitivity is 99% and specificity is 90%. Which of the following.
Present: Disease Past: Exposure
How many study subjects are required ? (Estimation of Sample size) By Dr.Shaik Shaffi Ahamed Associate Professor Dept. of Family & Community Medicine.
Statistical Core Didactic
How to read a paper D. Singh-Ranger.
Confidence Intervals and p-values
Epidemiological Studies
Class session 7 Screening, validity, reliability
Critical Reading of Clinical Study Results
Critical Appraisal Skills quantitative reviews
Critical Appraisal Dr Samantha Rutherford
Research Rotation Part II
مقدمه‌ای بر طب مبتنی بر شواهد
Variables and Measurement (2.1)
Dabigatran vs Warfarin in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation – Results
remember to round it to whole numbers
An activity-based journal club to help staff & students improve confidence at reading scientific papers Cornwall Health Library: Katy Oak Catriona Organ.
کارگاه تکميلی کشوری تربيت مربی آموزش طب مبتنی بر شواهد
Interpreting Basic Statistics
Appraisal of an RCT using a critical appraisal checklist
EBM – therapy Dr. Tina Dewi J , dr., SpOG
Associate Fellow, Centre for Evidence-based Medicine, Oxford
The objective of this lecture is to know the role of random error (chance) in factor-outcome relation and the types of systematic errors (Bias)
Interpreting Epidemiologic Results.
PICO model for developing EBM questions
Research Techniques Made Simple: Interpreting Measures of Association in Clinical Research Michelle Roberts PhD,1,2 Sepideh Ashrafzadeh,1,2 Maryam Asgari.
Basic statistics.
Medical Statistics Exam Technique and Coaching, Part 2 Richard Kay Statistical Consultant RK Statistics Ltd 22/09/2019.
Presentation transcript:

How to assess an abstract

Objectives Understand the principle differences between qualitative and quantitative research Understand the basic statistics employed in research Be able to assess a piece a research with confidence!

Qualitative research Which type of questions does it answer? What methodologies are employed? Improving their validity

Assessing a qualitative paper Is the qualitative approach appropriate? Methodology Data analysis Results and conclusion

Quantitative Types of quantitative research RCT – design features, advantages & disadvantages Cohort Studies Case control studies Cross section surveys

BIAS Selection bias Observer bias Participant bias Withdrawal or drop out bias Recall bias Measurement bias Publication bias Selection bias – select sicker patients to get the active or new Rx and fitter patients to get placebo or older Rx Observer bias – if we know the patient has active treatment can subconsciously record health status as being better Participant bias – e.g. in study looking at Gi bleeds in NSAID v non-NSAID users, the people who are not prescribed NSAIDs buy them OTC. Withdrawal / drop out – if lose people from the study those left at thend may not be representative of those originally included, and their numbers may be very much smaller so affecting the validity and generalisability of event rates. Recall – mothers of kids with leukaemia remember living near high voltage cables. Mothers of kids without leukaeimia won’t remember living near cables coz to them it’s a trivial fact. Measurement bias – e.g. measuring BP in trials with sphygs that are not calibrated Publication bias – positive studies get published much more often than equivocal or negative studies

Assessing quantitive research

Commonly used statistics P values Relative Risk Reduction Absolute Risk Reduction Numbers Need to Treat Sensitivity Specificity Positive Predictive Value Negative Predictive Value

P values & CI p value = the probability of the outcome being due to chance p = 1 in 20 (0.05). > 1 in 20 (0.051) = not significant < 1 in 20 (0.049) = statistically significant CONFIDENCE INTERVALS This defines the range of values between which we could be 95% certain that this result would lie if this intervention was applied to the general population Straightforward, surely. If not see Simple Statistics by Frances Clegg, Cambridge Press.

RR, AR, ARR & RRR What are they? How do you calculate them?

Warfarin & AF study The annual rate of stroke was 4.5% for the control group Absolute Risk (Control group) = 0.045 1.4% for the warfarin group Absolute Risk (experimental group) = 0.014 Absolute Risk Reduction = 0.045 – 0.014 = 0.031 NNT = 32 Relative Risk = 0.014/0.045 = 0.31 = 31% Relative Risk Reduction = 0.045 – 0.014/0.045 = 0.68 = 68%

1/ARR = Number Needed to Treat. NNT How many people you need to treat with the study intervention to stop the study event from happening once. 1/ARR = Number Needed to Treat.

NNT EXAMPLES But these are all in different patient groups with interventions with very different costs so tables of NNTS are illustrative but no answer.

Screening tests – assessing their performance

Sensitivity The test’s ability to correctly identify those people with disease. If Sensitivity is <100% Disease is missed. So = True Positives True Positives + False negatives i.e. all those who truly Have the disease

Specificity The test’s ability to correctly exclude those people without disease If Specificity <100% then healthy people are told they may have disease = True Negatives True Negatives + False Positives i.e. all those who truly don’t have the disease

Positive predictive value If the test is positive, what is the chance of the person having the disease = positive predictive value. True Positives True positives + False Positives

Negative Predictive Value If the test is negative, what chance is there that the person doesn’t have the disease = negative predictive value. True negative True negative + False negative

Accuracy True positive + True negative True negative +true positive+ false negative + false positive

Urine dipstick to screen for Diabetes Example- urine dip test vs GTT (the gold standard) Diabetes +ve Diabetes –ve Result of urine test (n=27) (n=973) Glucose present (13) True +ve 6 False +ve 7 Glucose absent (987) False –ve 21 True -ve 966