Summary Measures and Measures of Effect: Summarizing and Comparing Outcomes in Rehabilitation Research. Part 2: Binary Outcomes

Evaluation of an Ultrasound-Assisted Longitudinal Axis Lateral Crest Approach to Radiofrequency Ablation of the Sacroiliac Joint

“…The most effective way to establish a causal relationship or interventional efficacy is done in a large, blinded, randomized controlled trial or a large, well-controlled, cohort study. Such rigorous study designs significantly reduce bias, confounding effects, and make the reader more confident in the relationship between an intervention and outcome 30–33 . Less rigorously designed studies reduce the causal relationship’s confidence and the interaction between the independent and dependent variables.…”

“…Such rigorous study designs significantly reduce bias, confounding effects, and make the reader more confident in the relationship between an intervention and outcome. [30][31][32][33] Less rigorously designed studies reduce the causal relationship's confidence and the interaction between the independent and dependent variables. The relationship is referred to as an association and not causal.…”

Summary Measures and Measures of Effect: Summarizing and Comparing Outcomes in Rehabilitation Research. Part 3:Time‐to‐EventOutcomes, Unequal Follow‐up Times, and Survival Analysis

“…Then, we'll show two simplified examples inspired by the study, one with complete follow‐up and one with unequal follow‐up. We'll think about if it makes sense to interpret the data from each mock study using popular summary measures introduced in a previous feature: the proportion and the cumulative incidence (also called risk) 3 . Then, we'll use the mock studies and the published study to illustrate methods that are commonly used in evidence‐based practice to summarize or compare time‐to‐event data: the incidence rate, rate ratio, Kaplan‐Meier survival curves, and Cox proportional hazards regression.…”

“…(See our last feature for more details. ) 3 In layperson's terms, the 90‐day cumulative incidence is the chance of first UTI happening in 90 days and is expressed as either a percentage or a decimal ranging from 0 to 1. Then, as the measure of effect (the between‐group comparison measure), we could use the relative risk (also called risk ratio).…”