The Rochester Diabetic Neuropathy Study: Design, criteria for types of neuropathy, selection bias, and reproducibility of neuropathic tests

Neurology ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 799-799 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. J. Dyck ◽  
K. M. Kratz ◽  
K. A. Lehman ◽  
J. L. Karnes ◽  
L. J. Melton ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (11) ◽  
pp. 2193-2200 ◽  
Author(s):  
K R Heineman ◽  
D B Kuiper ◽  
Sla Bastide-van Gemert ◽  
M J Heineman ◽  
M Hadders-Algra

Abstract STUDY QUESTION Do ovarian stimulation (OS) and the in vitro laboratory procedures affect offsprings’ cognitive and behavioural outcome at 9 years? SUMMARY ANSWER OS and the in vitro laboratory procedures or the combination of both were not associated with cognitive and behavioural outcome at age 9 years. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY ART is not associated with an adverse short-term developmental outcome of the offspring, but limited knowledge is available on the offspring’s long-term neurodevelopmental condition. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION A 9-year longitudinal, assessor-blinded, prospective follow-up study of 169 out of 215 singletons (79%) born between March 2005 and December 2006 was performed. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Singletons born following IVF or ICSI with OS (n = 57), born after modified natural cycle IVF/ICSI (MNC-IVF/ICSI; n = 46) and born after natural conception to subfertile couples (Sub-NC; n = 66), were assessed at 9 years. This study design, with two ART groups and a subfertile reference group, allows for disentangling the effects of OS and ART procedures on developmental outcome. Cognitive outcome was evaluated with the Wechsler abbreviated scale of intelligence and the NEPSY-II. Behaviour was assessed with the child behaviour checklist (CBCL) and teacher report form (TRF). Univariable analyses and multiple linear regression models were used. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE There was no significant difference in intelligence quotient (IQ) scores between ART groups (mean IQ (95% CI): OS 114.8 (83.2–142.6); MNC 114.0 (90.2–140.8); Sub-NC 115.4 (87.9–141.2), P = 0.746). Multivariable analyses did not reveal a statistically significant association between ART group and total, verbal and performance IQ. CBCL and TRF scores did not differ significantly between ART groups (P = 0.090 and 0.507, respectively). Multivariable analyses did not demonstrate a statistically significant association between ART group and CBCL and TRF total, or internalising and externalising T-scores. No significant correlations between time to pregnancy (TTP)—a proxy for the severity of parental subfertility—and outcome measures were found (Spearman rho between −0.050 and 0.049, NS), which was confirmed with multivariable analyses. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION The attrition rate of 21% may be considered as a limitation of the study; however, after a follow-up period of 9 years, this rate is generally considered acceptable, and there were no significant differences in background characteristics between children with and without follow-up, making an attrition-related selection bias less likely. Another limitation of the study is the relatively small sample size, which could contribute to selection bias, hamper generalizability to the ART population and lead to false negative findings as a result of underpowering. An a priori power analysis on total IQ indicated that the OS-IVF/ICSI and Sub-NC groups should contain 64 children, confirming that our study including 57 and 66 children, respectively, was slightly underpowered. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Our study indicated that OS and the in vitro laboratory procedures or the combination of both and TTP were not associated with cognitive and behavioural outcome at 9 years. These are reassuring results for both parents and clinicians involved in ART. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) The study was financially supported by the University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), two graduate schools of the UMCG (BCN and SHARE) and the Cornelia Stichting. The sponsors of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation or writing of the report. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.


Author(s):  
Alan J. Silman ◽  
Gary J. Macfarlane ◽  
Tatiana Macfarlane

There are two major reasons to maximize participation in an epidemiological study. Firstly, low participation can lead to bias and secondly, inadequate numbers recruited can limit the power of the study. All other things being equal, lower participation will increase the influence of non-response bias in a study. However, it should be noted that even in studies with high participation there exists a possibility of selection bias if non-participants are markedly different from participants in aspects that are key to the conditions being studied. There are several ways of boosting participation which should be embedded into the study design from the start, since chasing up to increase participation is resource-expensive.


BMC Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Van Thu Nguyen ◽  
Mishelle Engleton ◽  
Mauricia Davison ◽  
Philippe Ravaud ◽  
Raphael Porcher ◽  
...  

Abstract Background To assess the completeness of reporting, research transparency practices, and risk of selection and immortal bias in observational studies using routinely collected data for comparative effectiveness research. Method We performed a meta-research study by searching PubMed for comparative effectiveness observational studies evaluating therapeutic interventions using routinely collected data published in high impact factor journals from 01/06/2018 to 30/06/2020. We assessed the reporting of the study design (i.e., eligibility, treatment assignment, and the start of follow-up). The risk of selection bias and immortal time bias was determined by assessing if the time of eligibility, the treatment assignment, and the start of follow-up were synchronized to mimic the randomization following the target trial emulation framework. Result Seventy-seven articles were identified. Most studies evaluated pharmacological treatments (69%) with a median sample size of 24,000 individuals. In total, 20% of articles inadequately reported essential information of the study design. One-third of the articles (n = 25, 33%) raised some concerns because of unclear reporting (n = 6, 8%) or were at high risk of selection bias and/or immortal time bias (n = 19, 25%). Only five articles (25%) described a solution to mitigate these biases. Six articles (31%) discussed these biases in the limitations section. Conclusion Reporting of essential information of study design in observational studies remained suboptimal. Selection bias and immortal time bias were common methodological issues that researchers and physicians should be aware of when interpreting the results of observational studies using routinely collected data.


1982 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 81-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niels Sten Hansen ◽  
Bernard Jeune

The objective of this study was to examine whether slaughterhouse workers (SW) in Denmark have a higher incidence of disability than expected in comparison with the general population and the sub-group of the population that is gainfully employed, especially with regard to pensions awarded for incapacity related to the musculo-skeletal system. There were 122 male SW who were awarded disability pensions (medium or high level of compensation) in the 3-year period 1977–79 as compared with the expected figure, 152.3 ( p<0.05) and 40 disability pensions awarded to female SW as compared with 30.7 (0.05 p<0.10). In men the Standardized Disability Ratio (SDR) increases with age. High SDRs are observed for diagnosis in the musculo-skeletal system for both sexes. The difference between observed and expected values does not change appreciably when the expected values are calculated on the basis of age-specific incidence rates among all actively employed people. Problems of the study design and selection bias are discussed to facilitate the interpretation of results. A possible deleterious effect of meatpacking on the musculo-skeletal system calls for further investigation.


Author(s):  
Rachel Churchill

Critical appraisal skills are essential for interpreting studies and performing research. Each study design is susceptible to its own problems, and this chapter has summarized some of these areas of weakness, so that, for example, when reading a case–control study the immediate consideration should be whether there is recall or selection bias. However the essential characteristic of good research which has been well reported is that the reader is able to understand each stage of the process from setting out the aims of the study to reporting its conclusions.


JAMA ◽  
1966 ◽  
Vol 197 (7) ◽  
pp. 39b-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Ellenberg
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document