#121
|
|||
|
|||
Well done!
Òàêè äà, ëó÷øå è íå ñêàæåøü! Åù¸ ðàç ñïàñèáî. ÇÛ Ïðîäîëæåíèå ñëåäóåò ;-) |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
Äîáðûé âå÷åð "íåñïÿùèì"!
(ÿ â÷åðà ñ 19 äî 7-30 ñåãîäíÿ óìóäðèëñÿ Èòàê: Model-based period analysis "ìîäåëèðóåìûé àíàëèç ïîñëåäîâàòåëíîñòåé"? "àíàëèç ïîñëåäîâàòåëüíîñòåé íà ìîäåëè"? Âîò îáîðîò In a previous evaluation, it was shown that model-based period analysis, on incorporating long-term survival trends into the modelling of period relative survival estimates, enabled a reliable projection of survival estimates into the near future calendar period-specific life tables ? |
#123
|
||||
|
||||
Êîëëåãè, ÷òî òàêîå adjusted hazard ratio?
Ñïàñèáî. |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
Ýòî òàê è åñòü èëè ïåðåä adjusted ÷òî òî åùå? Ïðîñòî êàê âàðèàíò:multivariate-adjusted relative risk - îòíîñèòåëüíûé ðèñê, (ðàññ÷èòàííûé) ñ ó÷åòîì ìíîãèõ ôàêòîðîâ èëè ìíîãîôàêòîðíûé ðèñê. Èëè îòíîñèòåëüíûé ðèñê ñêîððåêòèðîâàííûé ïî...
|
#125
|
||||
|
||||
Ñïàñèáî. Íåò, ïåðåä adjusted ñëîâ íåò. À hazard ratio ðàçâå èäåíòè÷åí relative risk? Âèêèïïåäèÿ äàåò òðàêòîâêó õàçàðä ðåéòèî â êîíòåêñòå âûæèâàåìîñòè,à â òåêñòå ñòàòüè êàê ðàç êðèâûå Êàïëàíà - Ìåéåðà ïðèñóòñòâóþò...
|
#126
|
|||
|
|||
Âðîäå ýòî è åñòü îòíîñèòåëüíûé ðèñê â àíàëèçå âûæèâàåìîñòè
Öèòàòà:
|
#127
|
||||
|
||||
Ñïàñèáî, ñòàëî ÿñíåå.
"Relative risk - (Îòíîñèòåëüíûé ðèñê – ÎÐ) – îòíîøåíèå ÷àñòîòû èçó÷àåìîãî èñõîäà â ãðóïïå âìåøàòåëüñòâà ê åãî ÷àñòîòå â ãðóïïå êîíòðîëÿ. ÎÐ ðàâåí ÷àñòîòå èñõîäîâ â ãðóïïå âìåøàòåëüñòâà äåëåííîé íà ÷àñòîòó èñõîäîâ â ãðóïïå êîíòðîëÿ. Çíà÷åíèå ÎÐ îò 0 äî 1 ñîîòâåòñòâóåò ñíèæåíèþ ðèñêà, áîëåå 1 - åãî óâåëè÷åíèþ. ÎÐ ðàâíûé 1 îçíà÷àåò îòñóòñòâèå ýôôåêòà. Èñïîëüçóåòñÿ â ðàíäîìèçèðîâàííûõ êîíòðîëèðóåìûõ èñïûòàíèÿõ è êîãîðòíûõ èññëåäîâàíèÿõ." Ñóòü îòíîñèòåëüíîãî ðèñêà â ñðàâíèòåëüíûõ èññëåäîâàíèÿõ ïîíÿòíà. Îäíàêî, ÷òî áåðåòñÿ çà 1 RR â èññëåäîâàíèÿõ áåç ãðóïïû êîíòðîëÿ? Âîò, íàïðèìåð, àíàëèç ðèñêîâ èíôåêöèè ïî äàííûì Ôèíñêîãî ðåãèñòðà ýíäîïðîòåçèðîâàíèÿ êðóïíûõ ñóñòàâàõ. Ïî÷òè âî âñåõ ðóáðèêàõ çà 1 áåðåòñÿ íàèìåíüøèé ðèñê èëè ïîêàçàòåëü, ñîîòâåòñòâóþùèé çíà÷èòåëüíî áîëüøåìó ÷èñëó íàáëþäåíèé, íî íå âñåãäà. [Ññûëêè äîñòóïíû òîëüêî çàðåãèñòðèðîâàííûì ïîëüçîâàòåëÿì ] |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
Óïñ... Ñ ýòèì ê LupusDoc'ó íå èíà÷å
|
#129
|
|||
|
|||
An ideal comparison occurs when two compared groups are identical
in all respects except for one specific variable. Then, logically, any difference observed between the groups is due to that single variable. Assigning individuals at random to one group that receives a treatment and to another that does not receive the treatment (randomization) is an attempt to approximate this ideal comparison. In this case, the groups are not identical but likely balanced with respect to all variables other than the treatment. The comparison of human survival between nonrandomized groups, however, is frequently far from this ideal. The groups compared typically differ in anumber of respects, making it difficult (at best) to attribute observed differences to a single influence (not balanced). An additive model is designed to produce statistical comparisons as if the compared groups were “identical” for all but one variable. Each estimated regression coefficient indicates the influence of a single variable as if the other k – 1 variables were balanced between the compared groups, leading to an easily interpreted measure of association. Of course, the imbalances caused by other variables are only “equalized” when they are measured and included in the model. Of equal importance, the model must accurately represent the relationships within the collected data. When randomization is not possible, frequently the situation in the study of human mortality and disease, an additive model provides an opportunity to interpret comparisons between variables as if the groups had been formed by randomization. [Ññûëêè äîñòóïíû òîëüêî çàðåãèñòðèðîâàííûì ïîëüçîâàòåëÿì ] |
#130
|
||||
|
||||
 Âàøåé òàáëèöå, óâàæàåìûé Àíäðåé â êà÷åñòâå ãðóïïû ñðàâíåíèÿ âûñòóïàåò ãðóïïà ñ íåêèì ôàêòîðîì: ñ ïîñòîïåðàöèîííûìè îñëîæíåíèÿìè ïî îòíîøåíèþ ê ãðóïïå áåç íèõ, äðóãèå ãîñïèòàëÿ è óíèâåðñèòåòñêèé ãîñïèòàëü è ò. ï. Adjusted - ýòî ñêîððåêòèðîâàííûé (íà äðóãèå ôàêòîðû - ïîë, âîçðàñò è ò. ï.).
|
#131
|
||||
|
||||
Óâàæàåìûå êîëëåãè!
Although male sex also was associated with an increased rate of reoperations for the treatment of infection, the conflicting results of earlier studies [3,4,7,13] suggest that sex differences likely function as a proxy for some risk factors. Ìîæíî ëè ïåðåâåñòè: ìóæñêîé ïîë âåðîÿòíî âûñòóïàåò â êà÷åñòâå "ïðîêñè"-ôàêòîðà ðèñêà, à íå êàê ñàìîñòîÿòåëüíûé ôàêòîð. Èëè öåëåñîîáðàçíî èñïîëüçîâàòü êàêîé-íèáóäü ñèíîíèì? Êàêîé? Ñïàñèáî. |
#132
|
|||
|
|||
ß áû ïåðåâåë òàê:
The conflicting results of earlier studies [3,4,7,13] suggest that sex differences likely function as a proxy for some risk factors. Ïðîòèâîðå÷èâûå ðåçóëüòàòû ïðåäûäóùèõ (ðàííèõ) èññëåäîâàíèé çàñòàâëÿþò ïðåäïîëîæèòü, ÷òî ðàçëè÷èÿ ïî ïîëó âûñòóïàþò â ðîëè èíäèêàòîðîâ, òåñíî ñâÿçàííûõ ñ íåêèìè ñàìîñòîÿòåëüíûìè ôàêòîðàìè ðèñêà. |
#133
|
||||
|
||||
Óâàæàåìûå êîëëåãè!
Êàê ïåðåâåñòè "test-retest" ïðîöåäóðó ïðèìåíèòåëüíî ê âàëèäèçàöèè øêàëû? Èëè ìû ìîæåì â äèññåðå òàê è íàïèñàòü - âûïîëíåí òåñò-ðèòåñò (ñ ðàçíûìè áàëëüíûìè îöåíêàìè ïàðàìåòðà)? |
#134
|
|||
|
|||
|
#135
|
|||
|
|||
Öèòàòà:
(ïðåäâåñòíèêîì? åñòü æå êàêîå-òî ñëîâî, êðóòèòüñÿ â ìîñêå...) Åñëè ê îðòîïåäèè, òî æåíùèíà = àíàòîìè÷åñêèå îñîáåííîñòè ñòðîåíèÿ ñêåëåòà, îñòåîïîðîç â ìåíîïàóçå, íîøåíèå îáóâè íà âûñîêèõ êàáëóêàõ... Åñëè ÿ ïðàâèëüíî ïîíèìàþ ;-) Âî, à åñëè "ïðåäîïðåäåë¸ííûì óñëîâèåì äëÿ ðÿäà íåñâÿçàíûõ ôàêòîðîâ ðèñêà" |