2015
DOI: 10.1007/s11999-015-4535-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Editorial: No-difference Studies Make a Big Difference

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

4
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We, however, are taking this opportunity to comment on such studies in this present review. In addition, although many studies may not be able to detect differences in outcomes in patients who performed, or did not perform, the particular rehabilitation, it should be remembered that "no-difference studies make a big difference" [64].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We, however, are taking this opportunity to comment on such studies in this present review. In addition, although many studies may not be able to detect differences in outcomes in patients who performed, or did not perform, the particular rehabilitation, it should be remembered that "no-difference studies make a big difference" [64].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…replicated in practice. And insufficient power-failure to detect a betweengroups difference that was in fact present-should always be on our minds as we read no-difference studies [7]. Fortunately, the study in this month's Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research ® by Dr. Kamal's group addressed these concerns thoughtfully-the propensity-scoring approach used plus the vast number of patients analyzed provide as compelling an answer as we are likely to get on this important topic.…”
Section: Robin N Kamal MDmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…' The authors defined a clinically important difference (five points on the Oxford score), powered the study to detect this difference, and accounted for all of their patients. They reported a set of no-difference conclusions; doing so is critically important [4]. They present the no-difference findings with modesty and clarity, and ask fair questions about the risks associated with a technique they explored.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%