Statistical Fragility in Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery Studies: A Review of Randomized Trials.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Olajumoke M Megafu
{"title":"Statistical Fragility in Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery Studies: A Review of Randomized Trials.","authors":"Olajumoke M Megafu","doi":"10.1089/lap.2024.0121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Purpose:</i></b> The <i>P</i> value has been used as a statistical tool in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to establish significance but does not provide information on the robustness of a study when used alone. The fragility index (FI) provides a supplemental approach for demonstrating robustness in RCTs that report dichotomous outcomes. This study aims to determine the statistical fragility of RCTs that compare minimally invasive techniques with open techniques in managing benign and malignant colorectal diseases. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Dichotomous outcomes of minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery in RCTs from 2000 to 2023 were assessed. The overall FI and fragility quotient (FQ) of each study were calculated. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Of the 1377 screened studies, 50 met the inclusion criteria. In total, 820 outcomes were recorded with 747 outcomes reported as not significant (<i>P</i> ≥ .05) and 73 as significant (<i>P</i> < .05). The overall FI for all studies including all outcomes was 5 (interquartile range [IQR] 4-7) with a FQ of 0.031 (IQR 0.014-0.062). Of the 50 RCTs, 6 (12%) reported a loss to follow-up that was greater than the overall FI of 5. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> As RCTs are judged increasingly beyond just the <i>P</i> value, practicing colorectal surgeons will benefit from using and interpreting the FI, FQ, and the <i>P</i> value of studies both in analyzing future RCTs and in determining whether or not to make a change in their clinical practice if there is an efficiently true discovery.</p>","PeriodicalId":50166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2024.0121","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The P value has been used as a statistical tool in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to establish significance but does not provide information on the robustness of a study when used alone. The fragility index (FI) provides a supplemental approach for demonstrating robustness in RCTs that report dichotomous outcomes. This study aims to determine the statistical fragility of RCTs that compare minimally invasive techniques with open techniques in managing benign and malignant colorectal diseases. Methods: Dichotomous outcomes of minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery in RCTs from 2000 to 2023 were assessed. The overall FI and fragility quotient (FQ) of each study were calculated. Results: Of the 1377 screened studies, 50 met the inclusion criteria. In total, 820 outcomes were recorded with 747 outcomes reported as not significant (P ≥ .05) and 73 as significant (P < .05). The overall FI for all studies including all outcomes was 5 (interquartile range [IQR] 4-7) with a FQ of 0.031 (IQR 0.014-0.062). Of the 50 RCTs, 6 (12%) reported a loss to follow-up that was greater than the overall FI of 5. Conclusions: As RCTs are judged increasingly beyond just the P value, practicing colorectal surgeons will benefit from using and interpreting the FI, FQ, and the P value of studies both in analyzing future RCTs and in determining whether or not to make a change in their clinical practice if there is an efficiently true discovery.

微创结直肠手术研究中的统计脆弱性:随机试验回顾。
目的:P 值一直是随机对照试验 (RCT) 中用来确定显著性的统计工具,但单独使用时并不能提供有关研究稳健性的信息。脆性指数(FI)提供了一种补充方法,用于证明报告二分法结果的随机对照试验的稳健性。本研究旨在确定在治疗良性和恶性结直肠疾病时比较微创技术和开放技术的 RCT 的统计脆性。方法:对 2000 年至 2023 年期间 RCT 中微创手术与开放手术的二分法结果进行评估。计算每项研究的总FI和脆性商数(FQ)。结果:在筛选出的 1377 项研究中,有 50 项符合纳入标准。共记录了 820 项结果,其中 747 项结果无显著性意义(P ≥ .05),73 项结果有显著性意义(P < .05)。所有研究(包括所有结果)的总体 FI 为 5(四分位数间距 [IQR] 4-7),FQ 为 0.031(IQR 0.014-0.062)。在 50 项研究中,有 6 项(12%)报告的随访损失大于总体 FI 值 5。结论:随着对 RCT 的判断越来越不局限于 P 值,执业结直肠外科医生在分析未来的 RCT 和决定是否在临床实践中做出改变(如果有有效的真实发现)时,使用和解释研究的 FI、FQ 和 P 值将使他们受益匪浅。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
163
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques (JLAST) is the leading international peer-reviewed journal for practicing surgeons who want to keep up with the latest thinking and advanced surgical technologies in laparoscopy, endoscopy, NOTES, and robotics. The Journal is ideally suited to surgeons who are early adopters of new technology and techniques. Recognizing that many new technologies and techniques have significant overlap with several surgical specialties, JLAST is the first journal to focus on these topics both in general and pediatric surgery, and includes other surgical subspecialties such as: urology, gynecologic surgery, thoracic surgery, and more.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信