Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25797506›Full record

ReviewDeutsches Arzteblatt international2015

Big data in medical science--a biostatistical view.

Harald Binder, Maria Blettner

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. A new unbiased and highly automated approach to find new prognostic markers in preclinical research.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Medical big data: promise and challenges.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2017
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Big data for bipolar disorder.International journal of bipolar disorders · 2016
    Review
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Harald BinderInstitute of Medical Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics (IMBEI) at the University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz.
Maria Blettner

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInexpensive techniques for measurement and data storage now enable medical researchers to acquire far more data than can conveniently be analyzed by traditional methods. The expression "big data" refers to quantities on the order of magnitude of a terabyte (1012 bytes); special techniques must be used to evaluate such huge quantities of data in a scientifically meaningful way. Whether data sets of this size are useful and important is an open question that currently confronts medical science.

methodsIn this article, we give illustrative examples of the use of analytical techniques for big data and discuss them in the light of a selective literature review. We point out some critical aspects that should be considered to avoid errors when large amounts of data are analyzed.

resultsMachine learning techniques enable the recognition of potentially relevant patterns. When such techniques are used, certain additional steps should be taken that are unnecessary in more traditional analyses; for example, patient characteristics should be differentially weighted. If this is not done as a preliminary step before similarity detection, which is a component of many data analysis operations, characteristics such as age or sex will be weighted no higher than any one out of 10 000 gene expression values. Experience from the analysis of conventional observational data sets can be called upon to draw conclusions about potential causal effects from big data sets.

conclusionBig data techniques can be used, for example, to evaluate observational data derived from the routine care of entire populations, with clustering methods used to analyze therapeutically relevant patient subgroups. Such analyses can provide complementary information to clinical trials of the classic type. As big data analyses become more popular, various statistical techniques for causality analysis in observational data are becoming more widely available. This is likely to be of benefit to medical science, but specific adaptations will have to be made according to the requirements of the applications.

Indexed as

Database Management SystemsDatabases, FactualData Interpretation, StatisticalDatasets as TopicBiomedical ResearchInformation Storage and RetrievalMachine Learning

Identifiers

PMID25797506
PMCPMC4381554

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.