脆性指数通常被误读,价值不高:临床试验就是为了脆性而设计的。

IF 4.4 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
{"title":"脆性指数通常被误读,价值不高:临床试验就是为了脆性而设计的。","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.arthro.2024.08.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The Fragility Index (FI) is defined as the number of patients whose outcome would need to change to reverse a statistically significant finding to a nonsignificant finding. The FI is nothing more than a repackaging of statistical significance based on the <em>P</em> value, perpetuating (1) ignoring of results that are “not” statistically significant; (2) treating results that are statistically significant as certain; and (3) distracting from evaluation of clinical significance. A well-designed trial includes a sample size calculation to determine the <em>minimum</em> number of patients required to observe a difference between study groups (if a difference exists). By including this <em>minimum</em> number, clinical trials are designed to be fragile, yet subsequently criticized as such, leading readers to the incorrect conclusion that the studies are flawed. It’s time to move past systematic reviews focused on the FI.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55459,"journal":{"name":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Fragility Index Is Typically Misinterpreted and of Low Value: Clinical Trials Are Designed to Be Fragile\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.arthro.2024.08.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The Fragility Index (FI) is defined as the number of patients whose outcome would need to change to reverse a statistically significant finding to a nonsignificant finding. The FI is nothing more than a repackaging of statistical significance based on the <em>P</em> value, perpetuating (1) ignoring of results that are “not” statistically significant; (2) treating results that are statistically significant as certain; and (3) distracting from evaluation of clinical significance. A well-designed trial includes a sample size calculation to determine the <em>minimum</em> number of patients required to observe a difference between study groups (if a difference exists). By including this <em>minimum</em> number, clinical trials are designed to be fragile, yet subsequently criticized as such, leading readers to the incorrect conclusion that the studies are flawed. It’s time to move past systematic reviews focused on the FI.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55459,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749806324005607\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749806324005607","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

脆性指数(FI)的定义是,要将具有统计学意义的结果逆转为不具有统计学意义的结果,其结果需要发生变化的患者人数。脆性指数只不过是基于 P 值的统计显著性的重新包装,使以下情况长期存在:(1) 忽视 "不 "具有统计显著性的结果;(2) 将具有统计显著性的结果视为确定结果;(3) 分散对临床意义的评估。精心设计的试验包括样本量计算,以确定观察研究组间差异(如果存在差异)所需的最低患者人数。通过计算最小样本量,临床试验被设计得非常脆弱,但却因此受到批评,从而导致读者得出研究存在缺陷的错误结论。现在是时候摆脱只关注FI的系统性综述了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Fragility Index Is Typically Misinterpreted and of Low Value: Clinical Trials Are Designed to Be Fragile
The Fragility Index (FI) is defined as the number of patients whose outcome would need to change to reverse a statistically significant finding to a nonsignificant finding. The FI is nothing more than a repackaging of statistical significance based on the P value, perpetuating (1) ignoring of results that are “not” statistically significant; (2) treating results that are statistically significant as certain; and (3) distracting from evaluation of clinical significance. A well-designed trial includes a sample size calculation to determine the minimum number of patients required to observe a difference between study groups (if a difference exists). By including this minimum number, clinical trials are designed to be fragile, yet subsequently criticized as such, leading readers to the incorrect conclusion that the studies are flawed. It’s time to move past systematic reviews focused on the FI.
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
CiteScore
9.30
自引率
17.00%
发文量
555
审稿时长
58 days
期刊介绍: Nowhere is minimally invasive surgery explained better than in Arthroscopy, the leading peer-reviewed journal in the field. Every issue enables you to put into perspective the usefulness of the various emerging arthroscopic techniques. The advantages and disadvantages of these methods -- along with their applications in various situations -- are discussed in relation to their efficiency, efficacy and cost benefit. As a special incentive, paid subscribers also receive access to the journal expanded website.
×
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