ReviewComputational and mathematical methods in medicine2014
A new ratio for protocol categorization.
Review in Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present review describes and validates a new ratio "S" created for matching predictability and balance between TP and TN. Validity of S was studied in a three-step process as follows: (i) S was applied to the data of a past study predicting cardiac output response to fluid bolus from response to passive leg raise (PLR); (ii) S was comparatively analyzed with traditional ratios by modeling different 2 ∗ 2 contingency tables in 1000 hypothetical patients; (iii) precision of S was compared with other ratios by computing random fluctuations in the same patients. In comparison to other ratios, S performs better in predicting the cardiac response to fluid bolus and supports more directly the clinical conclusions. When the proportion of false responses is high, S is close to the coefficient correlation (CC). When the proportion of true responses is high, S is the unique ratio that identifies the categorization that balances the proportion of TP and TN. The precision of S is close to that of CC. In conclusion, S should be considered for creating categories from quantitative variables; especially when matching predictability with balance between TP and TN is a concern.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.