Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Reporting of numerical and statistical differences in abstracts

Reporting of numerical and statistical differences in abstracts OBJECTIVE: The reporting of relative risk reductions (RRRs) or absolute risk reductions (ARRs) to quantify binary outcomes in trials engenders differing perceptions of therapeutic efficacy, and the merits of P values versus confidence intervals (CIs) are also controversial. We describe the manner in which numerical and statistical difference in treatment outcomes is presented in published abstracts. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of General Internal Medicine Springer Journals

Reporting of numerical and statistical differences in abstracts

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/reporting-of-numerical-and-statistical-differences-in-abstracts-aNLclQ0vbV

References (30)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2002 by Society of General Internal Medicine
Subject
Medicine & Public Health; Internal Medicine
ISSN
0884-8734
eISSN
1525-1497
DOI
10.1046/j.1525-1497.2002.10114.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The reporting of relative risk reductions (RRRs) or absolute risk reductions (ARRs) to quantify binary outcomes in trials engenders differing perceptions of therapeutic efficacy, and the merits of P values versus confidence intervals (CIs) are also controversial. We describe the manner in which numerical and statistical difference in treatment outcomes is presented in published abstracts.

Journal

Journal of General Internal MedicineSpringer Journals

Published: May 18, 2007

There are no references for this article.