China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Thinking about Medical Error and Harm: Flaws in an Operator’s Reasoning and Decision-Making among Others 1
Published in Milos Jenicek, How to Think in Medicine, 2018
Outcome bias refers to the influence of knowledge gained at the outcome of a process, typically upon evaluations of decision quality. The result of this is that sometimes it enables mediocre processes to be judged as good and good processes as mediocre.16
Clinical Epidemiology: Sensitivity, Specificity and Misclassification
Published in Johan Giesecke, Modern Infectious Disease Epidemiology, 2017
Epidemiology is very much about good measurements. If the outcome of a study is whether or not the patient dies, or if the risk factor studied is gender, this is usually a small problem, but as soon as we use some kind of test to measure exposure or outcome, bias might be introduced.
Root cause analysis: Background and context
Published in Russell Kelsey, Patient Safety, 2016
Outcome bias is the tendency to judge the merits of a decision or action based upon its outcome.A two-year-old child with a fever was seen by a GP who diagnosed tonsillitis and prescribed antibiotics. Twenty-four hours later the child was found dead.
A systematic review and meta-analysis of the gonadotoxic effects of cyclophosphamide and benefits of gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) in women of child-bearing age with autoimmune rheumatic disease
Published in Expert Review of Clinical Immunology, 2020
Shi-Nan Luong, Anthony Isaacs, Zhixin Liu, Fang E Sin, Ian Giles
Outcome: was sustained amenorrhea (>12 months), and variables used to assess this risk due to IV cyclophosphamide ± GnRHa were: mean cohort age; mean IV cyclophosphamide cohort dose; incidence of sustained amenorrhea; mean age of patients with sustained amenorrhea; mean age of patients without sustained amenorrhea; mean IV cyclophosphamide dose of patients with sustained amenorrhea; and mean IV cyclophosphamide dose in patients without sustained amenorrhea. Information was also gathered where available on method of ensuring adequate menstruation pre-treatment; hormonal confirmation of sustained amenorrhea; and pregnancy data post-treatment. Outcome bias was assessed at the analysis stage and is presented in the discussion. The strength of evidence of each study was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) framework [21].
Effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions to prevent falls and fall-related fractures in older people living in residential aged care facilities – a systematic review and network meta-analysis protocol
Published in Physical Therapy Reviews, 2019
Michiel Twiss, Roger Hilfiker, Timo Hinrichs, Eling D. de Bruin, Slavko Rogan
We will assess the risk of bias of each included study with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2.0 (or newer version). We will evaluate the risk of bias in five domains:bias arising from the randomization process;bias due to deviations from intended interventions;bias due to missing outcome data;bias in measurement of the outcome;bias in selection of the reported result.
Cognition-oriented treatments and physical exercise on cognitive function in Huntington’s disease: protocol for systematic review
Published in Physical Therapy Reviews, 2022
Katharine Huynh, Leila Nategh, Sharna Jamadar, Nellie Georgiou-Karistianis, Amit Lampit
The RoB 2 tool considers:Bias arising from the randomisation processBias due to deviations from intended interventionsBias due to missing outcome dataBias in measurement of the outcomeBias in selection of the reported resultOverall bias