前测-后测对照组设计中使用的统计程序:五种伊朗期刊论文综述

Q3 Medicine
Nahid Dehghan Nayeri, F. Noodeh, H. Nia, Ameneh Yaghoobzadeh, Kelly A. Allen, A. Goudarzian
{"title":"前测-后测对照组设计中使用的统计程序:五种伊朗期刊论文综述","authors":"Nahid Dehghan Nayeri, F. Noodeh, H. Nia, Ameneh Yaghoobzadeh, Kelly A. Allen, A. Goudarzian","doi":"10.18502/acta.v61i10.15657","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The pretest-posttest control group design is one of the most widely used quantitative experimental design models for evaluating the efficacy of programs, treatments, and interventions. Despite the prevalence and utility of this research design, best practices for data analytical procedures are not clearly defined. Invalid results decrease the chance of generalization. Given that Iranian Journals are interested in publishing pretest-posttest control group design studies, it is important to denote the accuracy of them. The aim of the current study is to explore the correct procedure for using ANCOVA in pretest-posttest control group designs to mitigate the potential limitations of this approach. This study explores the use of ANCOVA in pretest-posttest control group design. It has been done by analyzing data from experimental studies published in five Iranian journals indexed in PubMed or Scopus between 2011 and 2018. The results indicate that among the 280 published experimental studies in these journals, 53 papers (18.9 percent) used ANCOVA as the statistical test in pretest-posttest studies. The power of the test represents the probability of detecting differences between the groups being compared when such differences exist. Our analysis concludes that ANCOVA, which runs a multiple linear regression, is a suitable method for comparing and examining pretest-posttest study designs. Implications of this study have potential utility for researchers employing the use of pretest-posttest control group designs in various fields in and outside of Iran.","PeriodicalId":6946,"journal":{"name":"Acta medica Iranica","volume":" 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Statistical Procedures Used in Pretest-Posttest Control Group Design: A Review of Papers in Five Iranian Journals\",\"authors\":\"Nahid Dehghan Nayeri, F. Noodeh, H. Nia, Ameneh Yaghoobzadeh, Kelly A. Allen, A. Goudarzian\",\"doi\":\"10.18502/acta.v61i10.15657\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The pretest-posttest control group design is one of the most widely used quantitative experimental design models for evaluating the efficacy of programs, treatments, and interventions. Despite the prevalence and utility of this research design, best practices for data analytical procedures are not clearly defined. Invalid results decrease the chance of generalization. Given that Iranian Journals are interested in publishing pretest-posttest control group design studies, it is important to denote the accuracy of them. The aim of the current study is to explore the correct procedure for using ANCOVA in pretest-posttest control group designs to mitigate the potential limitations of this approach. This study explores the use of ANCOVA in pretest-posttest control group design. It has been done by analyzing data from experimental studies published in five Iranian journals indexed in PubMed or Scopus between 2011 and 2018. The results indicate that among the 280 published experimental studies in these journals, 53 papers (18.9 percent) used ANCOVA as the statistical test in pretest-posttest studies. The power of the test represents the probability of detecting differences between the groups being compared when such differences exist. Our analysis concludes that ANCOVA, which runs a multiple linear regression, is a suitable method for comparing and examining pretest-posttest study designs. Implications of this study have potential utility for researchers employing the use of pretest-posttest control group designs in various fields in and outside of Iran.\",\"PeriodicalId\":6946,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta medica Iranica\",\"volume\":\" 12\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta medica Iranica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18502/acta.v61i10.15657\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta medica Iranica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/acta.v61i10.15657","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

前测-后测对照组设计是最广泛使用的定量实验设计模型之一,用于评估项目、治疗方法和干预措施的效果。尽管这种研究设计非常普遍和实用,但数据分析程序的最佳实践却没有明确定义。无效的结果会降低推广的机会。鉴于伊朗期刊对发表前测-后测对照组设计的研究很感兴趣,因此对其准确性进行鉴定非常重要。本研究旨在探讨在前测-后测对照组设计中使用方差分析的正确程序,以减少这种方法的潜在局限性。本研究探讨了在前测-后测对照组设计中使用方差分析的问题。研究分析了 2011 年至 2018 年期间在 PubMed 或 Scopus 索引的五种伊朗期刊上发表的实验研究数据。结果表明,在这些期刊上发表的 280 篇实验研究中,有 53 篇论文(18.9%)在前测-后测研究中使用了方差分析作为统计检验方法。检验功率表示在存在差异的情况下,检测出被比较组之间差异的概率。我们的分析得出结论,方差分析是一种多元线性回归,是比较和检验前测-后测研究设计的合适方法。本研究的意义对于在伊朗国内外各领域采用前测-后测对照组设计的研究人员具有潜在的实用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Statistical Procedures Used in Pretest-Posttest Control Group Design: A Review of Papers in Five Iranian Journals
The pretest-posttest control group design is one of the most widely used quantitative experimental design models for evaluating the efficacy of programs, treatments, and interventions. Despite the prevalence and utility of this research design, best practices for data analytical procedures are not clearly defined. Invalid results decrease the chance of generalization. Given that Iranian Journals are interested in publishing pretest-posttest control group design studies, it is important to denote the accuracy of them. The aim of the current study is to explore the correct procedure for using ANCOVA in pretest-posttest control group designs to mitigate the potential limitations of this approach. This study explores the use of ANCOVA in pretest-posttest control group design. It has been done by analyzing data from experimental studies published in five Iranian journals indexed in PubMed or Scopus between 2011 and 2018. The results indicate that among the 280 published experimental studies in these journals, 53 papers (18.9 percent) used ANCOVA as the statistical test in pretest-posttest studies. The power of the test represents the probability of detecting differences between the groups being compared when such differences exist. Our analysis concludes that ANCOVA, which runs a multiple linear regression, is a suitable method for comparing and examining pretest-posttest study designs. Implications of this study have potential utility for researchers employing the use of pretest-posttest control group designs in various fields in and outside of Iran.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acta medica Iranica
Acta medica Iranica Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
83
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: ACTA MEDICA IRANICA (p. ISSN 0044-6025; e. ISSN: 1735-9694) is the official journal of the Faculty of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences. The journal is the oldest scientific medical journal of the country, which has been published from 1960 onward in English language. Although it had been published quarterly in the past, the journal has been published bimonthly (6 issues per year) from the year 2004. Acta Medica Iranica it is an international journal with multidisciplinary scope which publishes original research papers, review articles, case reports, and letters to the editor from all over the world. The journal has a wide scope and allows scientists, clinicians, and academic members to publish their original works in this field.
×
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