2020
DOI: 10.1164/rccm.202003-0477ed
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Guidance on Statistical Reporting to Help Improve Your Chances of a Favorable Statistical Review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Methodological details are available in the online data supplement. Study design, hypothesis, methods, analyses, and findings are reported according to the STROBE checklist for cross-sectional studies [16, 17].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Methodological details are available in the online data supplement. Study design, hypothesis, methods, analyses, and findings are reported according to the STROBE checklist for cross-sectional studies [16, 17].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4,5 Indeed, epidemiologists have spent decades thinking about causality and developing methodologies to establish causal inference, from the well-known Bradford Hill criteria 6 to the Rubin potential outcomes framework 7 to directed acyclic graphs, 8 a method of visualizing causal pathways so as to help determine the appropriate statistical analysis. The epidemiological literature also includes critiques of methods for causal inference, for instance, urging more cautious application of propensity scores 9 or advising against the use of E values, a statistic purported to give an estimate of confounding. 10 In light of these considerations, we are introducing a set of guidelines for papers published in our urology journals.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, epidemiologists have spent decades thinking about causality and developing methodologies to establish causal inference, from the well‐known Bradford Hill criteria [6] to the Rubin potential outcomes framework [7] to directed acyclic graphs [8], a method of visualising causal pathways so as to help determine the appropriate statistical analysis. The epidemiological literature also includes critiques of methods for causal inference, e.g., urging more cautious application of propensity scores [9] or advising against the use of E‐values, a statistic purported to give an estimate of confounding [10].…”
Section: Scenario Language To Use Language To Avoidmentioning
confidence: 99%