China 
Africa 
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Thermal Imaging for Inflammatory Arthritis Evaluation
Published in U. Snekhalatha, K. Palani Thanaraj, Kurt Ammer, Artificial Intelligence-Based Infrared Thermal Image Processing and Its Applications, 2023
U. Snekhalatha, K. Palani Thanaraj, Kurt Ammer
The study design limits the results of the present study because neither criteria for recruiting patients and controls nor clear outcomes have been defined. Since the sonographers were not blinded to the clinical information; there would have been a certain observer bias. Hence, randomized blinded control study should be adopted in future to eliminate observer bias.
Relevant study design issues
Published in O. Ajetunmobi, Making Sense of Critical Appraisal, 2021
Observer bias occurs whenever subjective factors within an assessor systematically affect the way observations are scored or recorded. For example, a doctor who has a personal preference for ‘Treatment A’ may unconsciously be scoring patients on Treatment A more favourably than patients on ‘Treatment B’ whilst also searching for undesirable side-effects with more vigour with Treatment B subjects than with Treatment A subjects. Such is the human nature.
Nasal, bronchial, conjunctival, and food challenge techniques and epicutaneous immunotherapy of food allergy
Published in Richard F. Lockey, Dennis K. Ledford, Allergens and Allergen Immunotherapy, 2020
Mark W. Tenn, Matthew Rawls, Babak Aberumand, Anne K. Ellis
In a DBPC OFC, the food is prepared by someone other than the observer and test subject, often a dietician, who is not involved in administering or evaluating the patient during the challenge. The patient and the observer are unaware of when the test food is administered. Consequently, patient and observer bias are minimized. There is no set order in terms of administering the placebo or food in question. This form of challenge is deemed the “gold standard” when it comes to diagnosing FA [80]. However, DBPC OFC is a rigorous process and is often reserved for research purposes or select clinical cases [77,79,80,82].
Effect of eye closure on speech recognition in noise: in light and in darkness
Published in International Journal of Audiology, 2021
E-Ching Eugena Kok, Bradley McPherson
This study had several limitations. First, the experimenter undertaking data collection (the first author) in this study was not blinded to the conditions nor the hypotheses. This could possibly lead to observer bias. Participants were blinded to the hypotheses but not to the conditions as variables in this study are either visible or require voluntary participant action. The participants might possibly guess the experimental hypotheses and exhibit demand characteristics. Furthermore, this study only evaluated the effect of an external visual stimulus by comparing a sound booth in darkness and in light. However, a sound booth in light only contains a minimal and constant external visual stimulus, which is not very stimulating or distracting. This condition is not representative of the usual daily environment, where listeners are typically exposed to a complex visual environment which involves movements and changes. The greater complexity of the normal visual environment will introduce greater distraction and cognitive load, and may affect SRN performance more significantly. Finally, this study used unfamiliar sentences as test materials, while daily conversations are usually composed of contextual sentences, which would be easier to discriminate than those used in this study. Therefore, the results may not be representative of common daily situations, yet may represent unfamiliar communication situations where an individual will experience the greatest difficulty.
Training parameters and effects of high-intensity interval training in patients with spinal cord injury: a review of literature
Published in Physical Therapy Reviews, 2021
Haidzir Manaf, Nazirah Hasnan, Azhar Ariffin
Two reviewers used the NIH Quality Assessment Tool for Before-After (Pre-Post) Studies with No Control Group to assess the methodological quality of the non-controlled studies [13]. The reviewers used the study rating tools on the 12 items to assess the quality of each study as “good,” “fair,” or “poor.” These items comprise the risk for different types of bias, such as selection bias, reporting bias, or observer bias. The checklist can be accessed at URL: www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-assessment-tools (Table 31). For randomized control trial (RCT) studies, two reviewers used the PEDro scale to measure the included studies' internal validity. The PEDro scale has been found to have ‘fair’ to ‘good’ reliability [14]. The PEDro scale uses 11-point criteria and a point is awarded for each met criterion. A higher score indicates stronger internal validity. A consensus was reached through discussion if a difference between the two reviewers occurred. If no consensus could not be reached, a third independent reviewer determined the final decision.
Monitoring the Climate: Exploring the Psychological Environment in an Elite Soccer Academy
Published in Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 2020
Kieran Kingston, Daniel James Wixey, Kevin Morgan
In addition to adopting a novel approach in a challenging elite sport environment, the embedding of a member of the research team we would suggest is a privileged and seldom acquired position within an elite soccer academy. Furthermore, in fully briefing players and coaches from the outset (of an extended period of observation), it allowed the researcher to become immersed and accepted as a credible part of the social fabric of the academy, and thus to conduct a refined examination of the coach–athlete interaction. Nevertheless, although the research team followed a rigorous process in terms of linking organization and discourse to the TARGET structures, followed by a reflective process to manage potential inconsistencies, the results must be considered in the context of observational research, which in this case relied on one person’s perspective in the recording and initial interpretation of pertinent incidents. Further research should continue to ensure that observer bias is minimized in such designs through the use of established, systematic data processing and reporting of results in a manner that accurately reflects observations, and where any inferences are grounded in theory and previous research.