ReviewArhiv za higijenu rada i toksikologiju2025
Theory of random measurement errors: concepts, uses, and misuses.
Review in Arhiv za higijenu rada i toksikologiju, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We present an overview of the theory of random measurement errors, focusing on the underlying concepts rather than on a strict mathematical formulation. Although the related literature is extensive, one can frequently encounter partly or completely wrong usages of the theory. In many cases, these misuses stem from incomplete understanding of the basic principles. Our presentation is based on a discussion on similarities and differences between this theory and statistics, as they are used differently in analysing the results of an experiment. In statistics, the central parameters are the mean and standard deviation, which are related to a given statistical distribution. In the theory of random measurement errors, the mean has a different meaning, representing the best estimate of the true value of a measured quantity. The second parameter of importance is not standard deviation but the uncertainty of the mean, which sets the probability that the true value lies in a given interval around the mean. These conceptual differences are seldom pointed out, which sometimes results in doubtful or wrong analyses and presentations of measurement results. We illustrate our theoretical considerations with examples of proper and improper use of the theory.
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.