| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Aczel, Balazs, et al.
(författare)
-
Consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting multi-analyst studies
- 2021
-
Ingår i: eLIFE. - : eLife Sciences Publications. - 2050-084X. ; 10
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Any large dataset can be analyzed in a number of ways, and it is possible that the use of different analysis strategies will lead to different results and conclusions. One way to assess whether the results obtained depend on the analysis strategy chosen is to employ multiple analysts and leave each of them free to follow their own approach. Here, we present consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting such multi-analyst studies, and we discuss how broader adoption of the multi-analyst approach has the potential to strengthen the robustness of results and conclusions obtained from analyses of datasets in basic and applied research.
|
|
| 3. |
- Uhlmann, Eric, L., et al.
(författare)
-
Subjective Evidence Evaluation Survey For Multi-Analyst Studies
- 2024
-
Annan publikation (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Multi-analyst studies explore how well an empirical claim withstands plausible alternative analyses of the same data set by multiple, independent analysis teams. Conclusions from these studies typically rely on a single outcome metric (e.g., effect size) provided by each analysis team. Although informative about the range of plausible effects in a data set, a single effect size from each team does not provide a complete, nuanced understanding of how analysis choices are related to the outcome. We used the Delphi consensus technique with input from 37 experts to develop an 18-item Subjective Evidence Evaluation Survey (SEES) to evaluate how each analysis team views the methodological appropriateness of the research design and the strength of evidence for the hypothesis. We illustrate the usefulness of the SEES in providing richer evidence assessment with pilot data from a previous multi-analyst study.
|
|
| 4. |
- Harindhanavudhi, T, et al.
(författare)
-
Lumbar spine bone mineral density Z-score discrepancies by dual X-ray absorptiometry do not predict vertebral fractures in children
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research. - : SAGE Publications. - 1708-8267. ; 66:6, s. 980-985
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) remains the most common mode of bone mineral density (BMD) evaluation. In adults, presence of a lumbar spine (LS) BMD T-score discrepancy (>1 SD difference between adjacent vertebrae) can indicate a vertebral fracture. In children, however, the clinical significance of such discrepancies is unknown. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the association between LS DXA and LS morphology to elucidate the clinical significance of an LS BMD Z-score discrepancy. We identified 360 DXA scans performed between September 2014 and May 2016 in patients 5–18 years of age. DXA scans were cross-referenced against available LS radiographs and vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) within the 6 months preceding or following a DXA scan. After excluding 44 DXA scans because of spinal hardware, incomplete DXA, or repeat scans, 316 DXA scans were included; 81 (25.6%) had either an LS radiograph or a VFA. Twenty-five of 81 patients (30.9%) had >1 SD difference between adjacent vertebrae in LS BMD Z-score. Two of these 25 patients (8%) had a lumbar vertebral fracture documented by a spine radiograph. Of the remaining 56 patients who did not have a discrepancy >1 SD, 6 patients (11%) had a lumbar vertebral fracture. Discrepancies in LS BMD Z-scores were not associated with lumbar vertebral fractures and, in the absence of fractures, likely represented vertebral developmental variants in children whose skeletons are still growing. Therefore, it does not appear justified to recommend further imaging based solely on the results of a DXA scan without clinically meaningful indications.
|
|
| 5. |
- Sarafoglou, Nikias, et al.
(författare)
-
Spatial infrastructure and productivity in Sweden
- 2006
-
Ingår i: Yugoslav Journal of Operations Research. - 0354-0243 .- 1820-743X. ; 16:1, s. 67-83
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Infrastructure consists of durable resources that are classified as "collective goods" generating external effects. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the role of spatial infrastructure on the industrial productivity in Sweden by utilising two complementary approaches: A non-parametric approach - Data Envelopment Analysis and a parametric approach - Production Function. These approaches are applied to a cross-section data set of regions in Sweden. These approaches show that metropolitan regions have relatively low road efficiencies in comparison with other regions in Sweden. On the other hand the northern regions are more efficient than the southern regions.
|
|
