• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

高知名度外科试验中使用患者报告结局测量指标的样本量计算:系统评价。

Sample size calculations in high-profile surgical trials that use patient-reported outcome measures: systematic review.

机构信息

Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Department of Plastic Surgery, Stoke Mandeville Hospital, Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust, Aylesbury, UK.

出版信息

Br J Surg. 2022 Feb 1;109(2):178-181. doi: 10.1093/bjs/znab421.

DOI:10.1093/bjs/znab421
PMID:34915565
Abstract

Sample size calculations from high-profile surgical RCTs that used a patient-reported outcome measure as primary outcome were reviewed systematically against Difference ELicitation in TriAls (DELTA2) standards, with a focus on target differences. In this sample of trials, there was frequent use of suboptimal methods to determine the target difference, and sample size calculations were generally not reported to DELTA2 standards. This risks over-recruitment and/or erroneous trial conclusions, which clinicians should be aware of when interpreting published trials.

摘要

对使用患者报告结局测量作为主要结局的高影响力外科随机对照试验的样本量计算进行了系统审查,重点是目标差异。在本试验样本中,经常使用次优方法来确定目标差异,并且通常未按照 DELTA2 标准报告样本量计算。这存在过度招募和/或错误试验结论的风险,临床医生在解释已发表的试验时应注意这一点。

相似文献

1
Sample size calculations in high-profile surgical trials that use patient-reported outcome measures: systematic review.高知名度外科试验中使用患者报告结局测量指标的样本量计算:系统评价。
Br J Surg. 2022 Feb 1;109(2):178-181. doi: 10.1093/bjs/znab421.
2
Predictors of failure to reach target sample size in surgical randomized trials.外科随机试验中未达到目标样本量的预测因素。
Br J Surg. 2022 Feb 1;109(2):176-177. doi: 10.1093/bjs/znab401.
3
Randomized controlled trials in pediatric surgery: could we do better?小儿外科的随机对照试验:我们能做得更好吗?
J Pediatr Surg. 2003 Apr;38(4):556-9. doi: 10.1053/jpsu.2003.50121.
4
Cost-utility analysis conducted alongside randomized controlled trials: are economic end points considered in sample size calculations and does it matter?伴随随机对照试验进行的成本-效用分析:经济终点是否被纳入样本量计算中?这有关系吗?
Clin Trials. 2013 Feb;10(1):43-53. doi: 10.1177/1740774512465358. Epub 2012 Dec 11.
5
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
6
A study of target effect sizes in randomised controlled trials published in the Health Technology Assessment journal.一项对发表在《卫生技术评估》杂志上的随机对照试验中目标效应大小的研究。
Trials. 2018 Oct 10;19(1):544. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-2886-y.
7
Reporting and methodological quality of sample size calculations in cluster randomized trials could be improved: a review.报告和方法学质量的样本量计算在整群随机试验中可以得到改善:一项综述。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2015 Jun;68(6):716-23. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.10.006. Epub 2014 Dec 15.
8
A reinvestigation of recruitment to randomised, controlled, multicenter trials: a review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies.重新调查随机对照多中心试验的招募情况:对两个英国资助机构资助的试验的综述。
Trials. 2013 Jun 9;14:166. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-166.
9
Improving Power and Sample Size Calculation in Rehabilitation Trial Reports: A Methodological Assessment.提高康复试验报告中的效能和样本量计算:一项方法学评估。
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016 Jul;97(7):1195-201. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.02.013. Epub 2016 Mar 10.
10
Outcomes in randomised controlled trials in prevention and management of carious lesions: a systematic review.预防和管理龋损的随机对照试验结果:一项系统评价
Trials. 2017 Nov 2;18(1):515. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-2256-1.