ArticleJournal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR2017
Method Comparison (Agreement) Studies: Myths and Rationale.
Article in Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dried blood spot compared to plasma measurements of blood-based biomarkers of brain injury in neonatal encephalopathy.Pediatric research · 2019Trial
- Use and reporting of Bland-Altman analyses in studies of self-reported versus measured weight and height.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2020Article
- Article
- Body temperature in premature infants during the first week of life: Exploration using infrared thermal imaging.Journal of thermal biology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unprecedented technological growth in the last quarter of twentieth century has resulted in improved health care and opened new domains of health care research. This technological leap also facilitated the paradigm shift from hospital care to home care through development of 'point of care' devices. As early diagnoses and timely referral is a key to health management, these devices play an important role in improving health. Validation of the new technology in different settings is necessary before adopting it to practice. For a binary result like pregnancy test, it is trivial to use statistical tools like sensitivity, specificity etc. For a continuous variable like blood glucose level the analysis is not straightforward. Many of us misinterpret 'association' as 'agreement'. This misinterpretation is reflected in studies which have compared two different technologies. The findings of well conducted studies do not contribute to the evidence base just because of wrong analysis strategy. We delineate on finer nuances of analysis and interpretation of method comparison studies.
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.