ArticleHealth services & outcomes research methodology2024
Evaluation via simulation of statistical corrections for network nonindependence.
Article in Health services & outcomes research methodology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Balanced patient assignment to healthcare centres through dispatching rules.Health systems (Basingstoke, England) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Social processes and social context are increasingly recognized as key factors shaping health-related behaviors and outcomes. One social process that may be acting within social networks is social influence, in which an individual's characteristic (e.g., specific health behavior) is potentially impacted by the corresponding characteristic of connected individuals in the network. In the health services context, healthcare providers who work together and share patients may influence each other through the knowledge transmission or development of clinical practice norms. Although many statistical techniques assume independence of data points, when analyzing data that may reflect social processes acting across a social network, it is imperative to account for the interdependencies (i.e., non-independence) across individuals. In practice, studies account for nonindependence in the context of estimating bivariate relations (correlations or linear regression) using a variety of analytic methods (some of which have previously been shown to yield biased results). To date, it is unclear which methods yield acceptable false positive rates, unbiased coefficient estimates, and acceptable statistical power, because there have been no systematic simulation studies comparing methods for addressing network nonindependence arising from social influence. To address this gap, we compared eight commonly used methods that purport to account for nonindependence using simulated network data. While results indicated that none of the techniques reduced false positive rates to the predicted (nominal) 0.05 level, random sampling of network nodes was the method that yielded the smallest false positive rates, yet came at a price of reduced statistical power. Further methodological development is needed.
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.