1 edition of Comparing clinical measurement methods found in the catalog.
Comparing clinical measurement methods
Includes bibliographical references and index.
|LC Classifications||R853.C55 C37 2010|
|The Physical Object|
|Pagination||xi, 157 p. :|
|Number of Pages||157|
|LC Control Number||2010010826|
Method Comparison and Bias Estimation Using Patient Samples; Approved Guideline—Second Edition This document addresses procedures for determining the bias between two clinical methods, and the design of a method comparison experiment using split patient samples and data analysis. The purpose of method comparison is to determine the agreement between two or more methods or analyzers measuring the same analyte. The experiment is preferably performed on split samples measured on both methods, and any difference found between the two methods should be interpreted as analytical difference.
illustrated by the evaluation of the measurement uncertainty for two clinical chemistry measurement procedures – the determination of creat inine in serum (using a chemical analyser) and free catecholamines in urine (a high performance liquid chromatography method). The current accreditation requirements are also discussed. same method, also called repeatability. In both cases we are concerned with the question of interpreting the individual clinical measurement. For agreement between two different methods of measurement, we ask whether we can use measurements by these two methods interchangeably, i.e. can the method by which the measurement was made be ignored.
Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute7 when comparing measurement procedures. Furthermore, when reporting the results of a method comparison study some academic journals, for example the Annals of Clinical Biochemistry8, require that a limits of agreement analysis be included. Reliability can be estimated by comparing different versions of the same measurement. Validity is harder to assess, but it can be estimated by comparing the results to other relevant data or theory. Methods of estimating reliability and validity are usually split up into different types. Types of .
Toward the common good
Stress distribution in welded flange-bolted web connections
U.S. congressional and state government directory
Recent progress in hormone research.
A New direction in Japanese defense policy
economics of public utility regulation
Trade Practices Legislation & Materials
man who tasted shapes
How to design, negotiable, and implement a free trade agreement in Asia
To Corinth with love
"This book presents useful information about the complexities of method comparison studies specific to clinical/biomedical research I would consider using it in a course intended for students seeking advanced degrees in biostatistics and epidemiology." (Doody's, 16 September )Cited by: Comparing Clinical Measurement Methods: A Practical Guide (Statistics in Practice Book ) - Kindle edition by Carstensen, Bendix.
Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and highlighting while reading Comparing Clinical Measurement Methods: A Practical Guide (Statistics in Practice Book ).5/5(2).
"In conclusion, this book provides a statistical modeling approach to the comparison of clinical measurements. The modeling aspects will be particularly appreciated by researchers and others mathematically sophisticated, while the computer code at the end of the book will be useful for practitioners wishing to implement the methods.".
"This book sets out to provide an example-based, 'how-to' guide to the comparison of measurement methods in a clinical context. Whilst much material has been published on obtaining and comparing accurate measurements in medical research this will be the first book length treatment of the subject.
Comparing Clinical Measurement Methods: A Practical Guide. Bendix Carstensen. ISBN: June Pages. E-Book $ Hardcover $ O-Book. Read an Excerpt Chapter (PDF) Table of Contents (PDF) Index (PDF) Description. This book provides a practical guide to analysis of simple and complex method comparison data, using Author: Bendix Carstensen.
This book provides a practical guide to analysis of simple and complex method comparison data, using Stata, SAS and R. It takes the classical Limits of Agreement as a starting point, and presents it in a proper statistical framework.
The model serves as a reference for reporting sources of variation and for providing conversion equations and plots between methods for practical use, Author: Bendix Carstensen. This book provides a practical guide to analysis of simple and complex method comparison data, using Stata, SAS and R.
Medical books Comparing Clinical Measurement Methods. It takes the classical Limits of Agreement as a starting point, and presents it in a proper statistical framework. Comparing Two Methods of Clinical Measurement: A Personal History Article (PDF Available) in International Journal of Epidemiology 24 Suppl 1(Supplement 1):S February with Reads.
Comparing Clinical Measurement Methods A Practical Guide Bendix Carstensen Steno Diabetes Center, Gentofte, Denmark & Department of Biostatistics, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
The Lancet Comparing methods of measurement: why plotting difference against standard method is misleading J.M. Bland PhD * a * Correspondence to: Dr J Martin Bland D.G. Altman BSc b a Department of Public Health Sciences, St George's Hospital Medical School, London SW17 ORE, UK b Medical Statistics Laboratory, Imperial Cancer Research Fund, London WC2, United Kingdon Summary When comparing.
Comparing Clinical Measurement Methods: A Practical Guide (Statistics in Practice) This book provides a practical guide to analysis of simple and complex method comparison data, using Stata, SAS and R. Medical books Comparing Clinical Measurement Methods.
It takes the classical Limits of Agreement as a starting point, and presents it in a. Comparing clinical measurement methods [electronic resource]: a practical guide.
Responsibility Bendix Carstensen. Imprint Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, This book provides a practical guide to analysis of simple and complex method comparison data, using Stata, SAS and R.
It takes the classical Limits of Agreement as a. standard method is misleading J Martin Bland, Douglas G Altman Summary When comparing a new method of measurement with a standard method, one of the things we want to know is whether the difference between the measurements by the two methods is related to the magnitude of the measurement.
Comparing Automated Office Blood Pressure Readings With Other Methods of Blood Pressure Measurement for systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the association between AOBP and office BP readings measured in routine clinical Study Selection Studies on systolic and diastolic BP measurement by AOBP in comparison.
Agreement between two methods of clinical measurement can be quantified using the differences between observations made using the two methods on the same subjects. The 95% limits of agreement, estimated by mean difference standard deviation of the differences, provide an interval within which 95% of differences between measurements by the.
It is important to find a comorbidity measure with better performance for use with administrative data. The new method proposed by Elixhauser et al.
has never been validated and compared to the widely used Charlson method in the Asia region. The objective of this study was to compare the performance of three comorbidity measures using information from different data periods in predicting short.
Journals & Books; Help Export. Advanced. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology. Vol Issue 2, FebruaryPages A comparison of methods for measuring event-related potentials Comparaison des méthodes de mesures des potentiels liés à l'événement.
Comparing methods of clinical measurement: reporting standards for bland and altman analysis. Mantha S(1), Roizen MF, Fleisher LA, Thisted R, Foss J. Author information: (1)Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, India.
[email protected] by: Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet ; – Article Google Scholar. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet, i–,  JM Bland and DG Altman.
Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, –,  B. Carstensen. Comparing Clinical Measurement Methods: A practical guide. Wiley. In clinical measurement comparison of a new measurement technique with an established one is often needed to see whether they agree sufficiently for the new to replace the old.
Such investigations are often analysed inappropriately, notably by using correlation coefficients. The use of correlation is misleading. An alternative approach, based on graphical techniques and simple calculations, is.que.
If the “limits of agreement” (mean bias ± 2SD) are not clinically important, then one could use two measurements interchangeably. Generalizability to larger populations is facilitated by reporting confidence intervals.
We identified 44 studies that compared methods of clinical measurement published during to in seven anesthesia journals. Although 42 of 44 (%) used the.He disagrees with the much used Bland & Altmann method (Statistical Methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement in The Lancet, ; i) and much of .