Michał Sikorski, Alexander Gebharter, Barbara Osimani
{"title":"Redefining Representativeness of a Sample in Causal Terms","authors":"Michał Sikorski, Alexander Gebharter, Barbara Osimani","doi":"10.1111/jep.70137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Rationale</h3>\n \n <p>Despite its crucial role, sample representativeness remains a controversial topic in the methodology of medical science. There is an ongoing debate not only about how best to define and ensure the representativeness of a sample (e.g., Rudolph et al. 2023; Porta 2016), but also about whether representativeness is worth pursuing at all (e.g., Rothman et al. 2013).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims and Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>Our aim is to construct a formalised, precise, and practical conceptualisation of sample representativeness.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We employ the established framework of causal Bayesian networks to develop such a conceptualisation.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>We propose a precise formal definition of sample representativeness that translates into clear and actionable methodological guidance. Additionally, we provide examples and a checklist to illustrate the application of the proposed conceptualisation.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>We believe that the presented definition will facilitate further discussion of the issue of representativeness and prove useful to scientists in practice.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":"31 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jep.70137","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70137","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Rationale
Despite its crucial role, sample representativeness remains a controversial topic in the methodology of medical science. There is an ongoing debate not only about how best to define and ensure the representativeness of a sample (e.g., Rudolph et al. 2023; Porta 2016), but also about whether representativeness is worth pursuing at all (e.g., Rothman et al. 2013).
Aims and Objectives
Our aim is to construct a formalised, precise, and practical conceptualisation of sample representativeness.
Methods
We employ the established framework of causal Bayesian networks to develop such a conceptualisation.
Results
We propose a precise formal definition of sample representativeness that translates into clear and actionable methodological guidance. Additionally, we provide examples and a checklist to illustrate the application of the proposed conceptualisation.
Conclusion
We believe that the presented definition will facilitate further discussion of the issue of representativeness and prove useful to scientists in practice.
尽管样本代表性在医学方法论中发挥着至关重要的作用,但它仍然是一个有争议的话题。目前的争论不仅是关于如何最好地定义和确保样本的代表性(例如,Rudolph等人,2023;Porta 2016),但也涉及代表性是否值得追求(例如,Rothman et al. 2013)。我们的目标是建立一个正式的、精确的、实用的样本代表性概念。方法我们采用因果贝叶斯网络的既定框架来发展这样一个概念化。我们提出了一个精确的正式定义的样本代表性转化为明确和可操作的方法指导。此外,我们提供了示例和清单来说明所提出的概念化的应用。我们相信所提出的定义将有助于进一步讨论代表性问题,并在实践中证明对科学家是有用的。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.