Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29699105›Full record

ReviewReproductive medicine and biology2012

Usefulness of statistics for establishing evidence-based reproductive medicine.

Yasunori Sato, Masahiko Gosho, Kiyotaka Toshimori

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Reproductive medicine and biology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 86% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Yasunori SatoClinical Research Center Chiba University Hospital 1-8-1 Inohana, Chuo-ku 260-8677 Chiba Japan.
Masahiko GoshoDepartment of Management Science, Graduate School of Engineering Tokyo University of Science Tokyo Japan.
Kiyotaka ToshimoriDepartment of Anatomy and Developmental Biology Chiba University Graduate School of Medicine Chiba Japan.
Chiba University · JPHarvard University · USTokyo University of Science · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the last decade, evidence-based medicine has been described as a paradigm shift in clinical practice, and as "the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients". Appropriate statistical methods for analyzing data are critical for the correct interpretation of the results in proof of the evidence. However, in the medical literature, these statistical methods are often incorrectly interpreted or misinterpreted, leading to serious methodological errors and misinterpretations. This review highlights several important aspects related to the design and statistical analysis for evidence-based reproductive medicine. First, we clarify the distinction between ratios, proportions, and rates, and then provide a definition of pregnancy rate. Second, we focus on a special type of bias called 'confounding bias', which occurs when a factor is associated with both the exposure and the disease but is not part of the causal pathway. Finally, we present concerns regarding misuse of statistical software or application of inappropriate statistical methods, especially in medical research.

Indexed as

Biostatistical methodsConfounding factorEvidence‐based reproductive medicineExploratory data analysisPregnancy rate

Identifiers

PMID29699105
PMCPMC5906827
OpenAlexW2087846288

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.