2010
DOI: 10.18553/jmcp.2010.16.2.134
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interpreting Hazards: The Increasing Importance of Antidote to Anecdote in Managed Care

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
(27 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Comprehensive Meta-Analysis 3.0 (Biostat, Englewood, NJ, USA) [48] was used to perform the meta-analysis by two authors (E.O.-G. and I.C.-P.). The pooled effect was calculated using the Cohen's Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) [49] that may be interpreted at three effect strength levels: small (SMD = 0.2), moderate (SMD = 0.5), and large (SMD ≥ 0.8) [50].When an outcome was assessed with data from studies that use the same measurement test, we calculate the mean difference (MD) to compare with the minimally clinically important difference (MCID) for that test. Forest plots were used to display our findings [51].…”
Section: Statistical Analysis and Additional Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Comprehensive Meta-Analysis 3.0 (Biostat, Englewood, NJ, USA) [48] was used to perform the meta-analysis by two authors (E.O.-G. and I.C.-P.). The pooled effect was calculated using the Cohen's Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) [49] that may be interpreted at three effect strength levels: small (SMD = 0.2), moderate (SMD = 0.5), and large (SMD ≥ 0.8) [50].When an outcome was assessed with data from studies that use the same measurement test, we calculate the mean difference (MD) to compare with the minimally clinically important difference (MCID) for that test. Forest plots were used to display our findings [51].…”
Section: Statistical Analysis and Additional Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Due to the heterogeneity in pathologic conditions and their characteristics and following the recommendations of Cooper et al (2009) (24), we chose the DerSimonian and Laird random effects model to estimate the overall pooled effect with its 95% CI to improve the generalizability of the findings (25). For continuous variables, the pooled effect was estimated using Cohen's standardized mean difference (SMD) calculation (26), which can be interpreted in three levels of effect intensity: small (SMD = 0.2), medium (SMD = 0.5) and large (SMD > 0.8) (27). To analyse the prevalence of occlusal disorders in scoliosis cases vs healthy controls and the prevalence of scoliosis in patients with and without stomatognathic disorders, we calculated the prevalence odds ratio (OR) together with its 95% CI.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, the black square represents the individual effect of each study in the meta-analysis and its horizontal black line represents the confidence level of this effect. Effect size can be interpreted as null (SMD = 0), low (SMD = 0.1-0.39), medium (SMD = 0.4-0.79), and large (SMD > 0.8) [54]. To assess the proportion of patients reporting adverse events, a meta-analysis of proportions estimating the event rate was conducted.…”
Section: Statistical Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%