Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Das ABC der medizinischen Statistik
View graph of relations

Das ABC der medizinischen Statistik: Klinische Studien lesen und verstehen

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Das ABC der medizinischen Statistik: Klinische Studien lesen und verstehen. / Labenz, J.; Kunz, C. J.
In: Ophthalmologe, Vol. 108, No. 1, 01.2011, p. 73-83; quiz 84.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Labenz J, Kunz CJ. Das ABC der medizinischen Statistik: Klinische Studien lesen und verstehen. Ophthalmologe. 2011 Jan;108(1):73-83; quiz 84. doi: 10.1007/s00347-010-2320-7

Author

Labenz, J. ; Kunz, C. J. / Das ABC der medizinischen Statistik : Klinische Studien lesen und verstehen. In: Ophthalmologe. 2011 ; Vol. 108, No. 1. pp. 73-83; quiz 84.

Bibtex

@article{823ee26a06e84f21871ea2f705f1bef7,
title = "Das ABC der medizinischen Statistik: Klinische Studien lesen und verstehen",
abstract = "Clinical trials test hypotheses that are accepted or rejected according to a predetermined probability of error (level of significance). Significance does not however mean relevance. Good parameters of relevance are absolute risk reduction and based on this the calculation of the number of patients who need to be treated for one additional patient to benefit. The randomized controlled trial is the gold standard for comparative evaluation of effects. In the ideal scenario it is designed so that a difference established by statistical methods becomes probable. In non-inferiority studies care should be taken that no equivalence is shown but rather that the difference is not greater than a predefined margin of error for differences. Meta-analyses of studies with similar endpoints have the potential to improve the level of evidence. Since the findings of meta-analyses depend on the studies included, critical assessment of the results is essential.",
keywords = "Data Interpretation, Statistical, Epidemiologic Measurements, Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic",
author = "J. Labenz and Kunz, {C. J.}",
year = "2011",
month = jan,
doi = "10.1007/s00347-010-2320-7",
language = "German",
volume = "108",
pages = "73--83; quiz 84",
journal = "Ophthalmologe",
issn = "0941-293X",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Das ABC der medizinischen Statistik

T2 - Klinische Studien lesen und verstehen

AU - Labenz, J.

AU - Kunz, C. J.

PY - 2011/1

Y1 - 2011/1

N2 - Clinical trials test hypotheses that are accepted or rejected according to a predetermined probability of error (level of significance). Significance does not however mean relevance. Good parameters of relevance are absolute risk reduction and based on this the calculation of the number of patients who need to be treated for one additional patient to benefit. The randomized controlled trial is the gold standard for comparative evaluation of effects. In the ideal scenario it is designed so that a difference established by statistical methods becomes probable. In non-inferiority studies care should be taken that no equivalence is shown but rather that the difference is not greater than a predefined margin of error for differences. Meta-analyses of studies with similar endpoints have the potential to improve the level of evidence. Since the findings of meta-analyses depend on the studies included, critical assessment of the results is essential.

AB - Clinical trials test hypotheses that are accepted or rejected according to a predetermined probability of error (level of significance). Significance does not however mean relevance. Good parameters of relevance are absolute risk reduction and based on this the calculation of the number of patients who need to be treated for one additional patient to benefit. The randomized controlled trial is the gold standard for comparative evaluation of effects. In the ideal scenario it is designed so that a difference established by statistical methods becomes probable. In non-inferiority studies care should be taken that no equivalence is shown but rather that the difference is not greater than a predefined margin of error for differences. Meta-analyses of studies with similar endpoints have the potential to improve the level of evidence. Since the findings of meta-analyses depend on the studies included, critical assessment of the results is essential.

KW - Data Interpretation, Statistical

KW - Epidemiologic Measurements

KW - Humans

KW - Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

U2 - 10.1007/s00347-010-2320-7

DO - 10.1007/s00347-010-2320-7

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 21253744

VL - 108

SP - 73-83; quiz 84

JO - Ophthalmologe

JF - Ophthalmologe

SN - 0941-293X

IS - 1

ER -