FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1986505010> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1986505010 endingPage "142" @default.
• W1986505010 startingPage "133" @default.
• W1986505010 abstract "Objectives. Previous periodontal literature has shown that there is a strong relationship between treatment effects, such as guided tissue regeneration (GTR), and baseline disease severity. However, relating change to baseline values using correlation or regression is methodologically flawed due to mathematical coupling, where the statistical procedure of testing the null hypothesis—that the coefficient of correlation or slope of regression is equal to zero—becomes erroneous. The aim of this study is to investigate if baseline disease severity is genuinely associated with the treatment outcome of intrabony defects using GTR after adjustment for mathematical coupling. In particular, we seek to demonstrate the potential effect that mathematical coupling has in distorting the results from the statistical analyses of trials of dental treatment, using data from the periodontal literature on GTR. The erroneous results arising from the use of simple correlation and regression techniques to analyse this association will be demonstrated, also the methodological flaw where the statistical procedure tests the null hypothesis—that the coefficient of correlation or the slope of regression is equal to zero. Methods. Three main periodontal journals were electronically and manually searched to extract the data for the clinical outcomes of pocket probing depth (PPD) and lifetime cumulative attachment loss (LCAL) in the studies using GTR. The relationship between clinical outcomes and baseline measurements were reanalysed using Oldham's method and the variance ratio test. Results. The results of these analyses were compared with those from the papers where the authors used the standard approach of correlation or regression. This shows that mathematical coupling caused spurious correlations between baseline disease severity and treatment effect. Ten out of 12 studies for PPD and nine out of 14 for LCAL initially claimed a significant positive relationship; after using either of the more appropriate statistical methods of adjustment, only three correlations in each group of studies remained significant. Conclusions: Previous evidence suggesting an association between baseline disease severity and treatment effect for GTR is challenged and therefore needs to be critically reviewed. All future clinical research should avoid using mathematically coupled data in correlation or regression analysis. In seeking to examine the bivariate association between baseline and subsequent change, Oldham's method is recommended." @default.
• W1986505010 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1986505010 creator A5004267303 @default.
• W1986505010 creator A5032209239 @default.
• W1986505010 creator A5042622898 @default.
• W1986505010 creator A5084659683 @default.
• W1986505010 date "2004-02-01" @default.
• W1986505010 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W1986505010 title "Mathematical coupling can undermine the statistical assessment of clinical research: illustration from the treatment of guided tissue regeneration" @default.
• W1986505010 cites W1913824165 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W1970365815 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W1977100560 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W1977833499 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W1982675763 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W1988194888 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W1994093971 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W1995203606 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W1998433395 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2007198611 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2016403202 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2028783497 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2043276332 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2049289398 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2054550755 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2056590595 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2065132148 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2083212368 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2091929389 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2132421073 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2157865781 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2164811796 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2168485493 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2171804709 @default.
• W1986505010 cites W2177254638 @default.
• W1986505010 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2003.10.001" @default.
• W1986505010 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14749085" @default.
• W1986505010 hasPublicationYear "2004" @default.
• W1986505010 type Work @default.
• W1986505010 sameAs 1986505010 @default.
• W1986505010 citedByCount "51" @default.
• W1986505010 countsByYear W19865050102012 @default.
• W1986505010 countsByYear W19865050102013 @default.
• W1986505010 countsByYear W19865050102015 @default.
• W1986505010 countsByYear W19865050102016 @default.
• W1986505010 countsByYear W19865050102017 @default.
• W1986505010 countsByYear W19865050102018 @default.
• W1986505010 countsByYear W19865050102019 @default.
• W1986505010 countsByYear W19865050102020 @default.
• W1986505010 countsByYear W19865050102021 @default.
• W1986505010 countsByYear W19865050102023 @default.
• W1986505010 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1986505010 hasAuthorship W1986505010A5004267303 @default.
• W1986505010 hasAuthorship W1986505010A5032209239 @default.
• W1986505010 hasAuthorship W1986505010A5042622898 @default.
• W1986505010 hasAuthorship W1986505010A5084659683 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C117220453 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C124101348 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C131584629 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C152877465 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C191897082 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C191988596 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C192562407 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C199343813 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C203763787 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C2524010 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C2780092901 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C48921125 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C55078378 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C65409693 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C83546350 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C87007009 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConcept C99476002 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C105795698 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C117220453 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C124101348 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C131584629 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C152877465 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C191897082 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C191988596 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C192562407 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C199343813 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C203763787 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C2524010 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C2780092901 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C33923547 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C41008148 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C48921125 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C55078378 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C65409693 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C71924100 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C83546350 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C87007009 @default.
• W1986505010 hasConceptScore W1986505010C99476002 @default.
• W1986505010 hasIssue "2" @default.

• next