Epidemiology and Clinical Research Design, Part 2: Principles

Manja, Veena; Lakshminrusimha, Satyanarayana

doi:10.1542/neo.16-2-e94

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the results were less convincing for the symptom subscales CD and GAD. The low prevalence of CD and GAD could partly explain this as it is challenging to reliably screen for disorders of low prevalence (24). In line with earlier studies (12,13), ADHD could be reliably identified with both the BCFPI and the CBCL.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Validity of the Brief Child and Family Phone Interview by comparison with Longitudinal Expert All Data diagnoses in outpatients

Andersson

Bäckström

Ivarsson

et al. 2018

Scandinavian Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The Brief Child and Family Phone Interview (BCFPI) is a standardized intake and follow-up interview used in child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS). Although it has shown good validity compared with other measures using parent reports, it has not yet been compared with diagnoses derived from a Longitudinal Expert All Data (LEAD) procedure, which includes information from separate diagnostic interviews with parent(s) and child. The aim was to compare the BCFPI evaluation in an outpatient child and adolescent psychiatry setting with an evaluation derived from a LEAD procedure. Methods: At four Swedish outpatient CAMHS, 267 patients were interviewed at intake with the BCFPI. Within six weeks, patients and parents were interviewed separately with the 2009 version of the semi-structured Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-age Children, Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL) and parents completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). LEAD diagnoses were subsequently determined by two senior clinicians based on 1.2 years of clinical records including the K-SADS-PL and ensuing information from further assessments, psychological tests, information from teachers and other informants as well as treatment outcome. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders subscales from the CBCL and the subscales from the BCFPI were compared with LEAD diagnoses. These measured symptoms of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, separation anxiety disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and major depressive disorder. Results: The criterion validity for BCFPI versus LEAD diagnoses was fair for oppositional defiant disorder (area under curve, 0.73), generalized anxiety disorder (0.73) and major depressive disorder (0.78), good for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (0.81) and conduct disorder (0.83), and excellent for separation anxiety disorder (0.90). The screening properties of BCFPI and CBCL were similar. Conclusion: The BCFPI is a concise and valid tool, performed along with the larger and more established CBCL, in screening for major psychiatric disorders. It is well suited as an intake interview in CAMHS.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity of the Brief Child and Family Phone Interview by comparison with Longitudinal Expert All Data diagnoses in outpatients

Andersson

Bäckström

Ivarsson

et al. 2018

Scandinavian Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The evidence from available prospective cohort studies and RCTs has both strengths and also weaknesses (106). Most prospective cohort studies have investigated risk factors in large populations with long follow-up periods, but one can never exclude residual confounding in cohort studies.…”

Section: Current Status Of Research In Relation To Prevention Prediamentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Dairy Products in the Development of Type 2 Diabetes: Where Does the Evidence Stand in 2019?

Guo

Givens

Astrup

et al. 2019

Advances in Nutrition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) has increased rapidly. Adopting a heathy diet is suggested as one of the effective behaviors to prevent or delay onset of T2D. Dairy consumption has been recommended as part of a healthy diet, but there remains uncertainty in both the scientific community and the public about the effect of different dairy products on T2D risk. In a recent workshop, the evidence on dairy products and T2D risk was presented and discussed by a group of experts. The main conclusions from the workshop are presented in this position paper and are as follows. 1) Available evidence from large prospective cohort studies and limited randomized controlled trials (RCTs) suggests that total dairy consumption has a neutral or moderately beneficial effect on T2D risk. 2) Increasing evidence from prospective cohort studies indicates that yogurt is most strongly associated with a lower T2D risk, but evidence from RCTs is scarce. 3) Fatty acids from dairy (medium-chain, odd, and very long-chain SFAs as well as trans-palmitoleic acid) are associated with lower T2D risk and improved metabolic health, but more research is needed on studies that explore cause and effect relations to exclude the possibility that the dairy fatty acids simply serve as markers of overall dairy consumption. 4) The food matrix can be a stronger determinant of health effects than SFA content. This review further identifies research gaps in the existing knowledge and highlights key research questions that need to be addressed to better understand the impact of dairy consumption on future T2D risk.

show abstract

Sample size variation in single-time post-dose assessment vs multi-time post-dose assessment

Sayyed

Mathur²,

Kamath

2022

F1000Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Many randomized trials measure a continuous outcome simultaneously at baseline and after taking the drug. For a single continuous post-treatment outcome, the sample size calculation is simple, but if there are assessments at multiple time points post-treatment then this longitudinal data may give more insights by analyzing the data using the repeated measures method. Also, if the sample size is calculated using the single time-point method for longitudinal data, it may lead to a larger than required sample size, increasing the cost and time. Methods: In this research, an effort is made to determine the size of the sample for repeated measures case and then compared with the single post-baseline case. The sample sizes were examined under different scenarios for the continuous type of response variable. Under Mean contrast and Diff contrast the sample sizes were calculated with different correlations. These two scenarios were again examined under compound symmetry as well as Auto regressive of order 1 type of correlation structure in longitudinal data. The graphical presentation is given for better visualization of the scenarios. Results: Sample size required for highly correlated longitudinal data using multi timepoint sample size derivation method led to much smaller sample size requirement as compared to single timepoint sample size calculation method. Conclusions: This study will help researchers to make better decisions in choosing the right method for sample size determination which may reduce the time and cost of carrying out the experiment. Also, we must carefully assess which method to go with when the correlation is weak. More complex correlation structures are not studied in this article but can be studied in the same fashion.

show abstract

Epidemiology and Clinical Research Design, Part 2: Principles

Cited by 4 publications

References 19 publications

Validity of the Brief Child and Family Phone Interview by comparison with Longitudinal Expert All Data diagnoses in outpatients

Validity of the Brief Child and Family Phone Interview by comparison with Longitudinal Expert All Data diagnoses in outpatients

The Impact of Dairy Products in the Development of Type 2 Diabetes: Where Does the Evidence Stand in 2019?

Sample size variation in single-time post-dose assessment vs multi-time post-dose assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About