FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2090260782> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2090260782 abstract "HomeHypertensionVol. 45, No. 5Letters to the Editor Free AccessLetterPDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessLetterPDF/EPUBLetters to the EditorCalculation of Reflection Wave Transit Time and Paired Data Analysis Wonsik Ahn and Jae Hyon Bahk Wonsik AhnWonsik Ahn Department of Anesthesiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea Search for more papers by this author and Jae Hyon BahkJae Hyon Bahk Department of Anesthesiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea Search for more papers by this author Originally published18 Apr 2005https://doi.org/10.1161/01.HYP.0000161989.27467.dbHypertension. 2005;45:e13Other version(s) of this articleYou are viewing the most recent version of this article. Previous versions: April 18, 2005: Previous Version 1 To the Editor:There are countless ongoing debates and discrepancies in the medical field. Some of the causal issues at the heart of these debates include detection errors, individual variations of recruited subjects, and, simply, our shortage of knowledge about human beings. There is another commonly noted source of discrepancy, statistical error. One frequently occurring misconception involves paired data analysis. Health scientists use several examples of paired data, for instance, right–left differences, arm–leg pressure differences, and variations in arterial pressure waveforms. I have observed one discrepancy of reflection wave transit time (RWTT) during arterial pressure wave form analysis.1–3 One report stated a mean of RWTT is 102 to 116 ms.1 The other stated the mean of RWTT is 129 ms.2 As to the cause of this variation, Mitchell et al “suspected” in his reply:“We suspect …. Rather than analyze individual high-fidelity waveforms, they ensemble-averaged waveforms from decade groups of participants into a single ‘age-decade wave,’ which was analyzed to obtain ‘mean’ waveform characteristics. This averaging process may have obscured waveform landmarks.”After reading this paragraph, some readers might think that both methods are adequate to obtain the RWTT and we could, in fact, take either result of RWTTs. However, from a statistical point of view, RWTT should be calculated from an individual waveform and then be averaged, because both foot and shoulder points are obtained from each volunteer, so they are matched.Paired data misanalysis is one of the most common errors in medical data analysis. If we use an independent analysis method instead of a dependent one, the results have less difference and, at times, no difference. Therefore, we should carefully analyze paired data with adequate statistical methodology.1 Kelly R, Hayward C, Avolio A, O’Rourke M. Noninvasive determination of age-related changes in the human arterial pulse. Circulation. 1989; 80: 1652–1659.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar2 Mitchell GF, Parise H, Benjamin EJ, Larson MG, Keyes MJ, Vita JA, Vasan RS, Levy D. Changes in arterial stiffness and wave reflection with advancing age in healthy men and women. The Framingham Heart Study. Hypertension. 2004; 43: 1239–1245.LinkGoogle Scholar3 O’Rourke MF, Nichols WW. Changes in wave reflection with advancing age in normal subjects. Hypertension. 2004; 44: E10–E11.LinkGoogle Scholar eLetters(0)eLetters should relate to an article recently published in the journal and are not a forum for providing unpublished data. Comments are reviewed for appropriate use of tone and language. Comments are not peer-reviewed. Acceptable comments are posted to the journal website only. Comments are not published in an issue and are not indexed in PubMed. Comments should be no longer than 500 words and will only be posted online. References are limited to 10. Authors of the article cited in the comment will be invited to reply, as appropriate.Comments and feedback on AHA/ASA Scientific Statements and Guidelines should be directed to the AHA/ASA Manuscript Oversight Committee via its Correspondence page.Sign In to Submit a Response to This Article Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails May 2005Vol 45, Issue 5 Advertisement Article InformationMetrics https://doi.org/10.1161/01.HYP.0000161989.27467.dbPMID: 15837838 Originally publishedApril 18, 2005 PDF download Advertisement" @default.
• W2090260782 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2090260782 creator A5000577299 @default.
• W2090260782 creator A5027604792 @default.
• W2090260782 date "2005-05-01" @default.
• W2090260782 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2090260782 title "Letters to the Editor" @default.
• W2090260782 cites W2128424863 @default.
• W2090260782 cites W2168072390 @default.
• W2090260782 doi "https://doi.org/10.1161/01.hyp.0000161989.27467.db" @default.
• W2090260782 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15837838" @default.
• W2090260782 hasPublicationYear "2005" @default.
• W2090260782 type Work @default.
• W2090260782 sameAs 2090260782 @default.
• W2090260782 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2090260782 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2090260782 hasAuthorship W2090260782A5000577299 @default.
• W2090260782 hasAuthorship W2090260782A5027604792 @default.
• W2090260782 hasBestOaLocation W20902607821 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConcept C149923435 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConcept C194051981 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConcept C2778137410 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConcept C2779526319 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConcept C42219234 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConcept C84393581 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConceptScore W2090260782C126322002 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConceptScore W2090260782C138885662 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConceptScore W2090260782C144024400 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConceptScore W2090260782C149923435 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConceptScore W2090260782C194051981 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConceptScore W2090260782C2778137410 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConceptScore W2090260782C2779526319 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConceptScore W2090260782C41895202 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConceptScore W2090260782C42219234 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConceptScore W2090260782C71924100 @default.
• W2090260782 hasConceptScore W2090260782C84393581 @default.
• W2090260782 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W2090260782 hasLocation W20902607821 @default.
• W2090260782 hasLocation W20902607822 @default.
• W2090260782 hasLocation W20902607823 @default.
• W2090260782 hasOpenAccess W2090260782 @default.
• W2090260782 hasPrimaryLocation W20902607821 @default.
• W2090260782 hasRelatedWork W1995515455 @default.
• W2090260782 hasRelatedWork W2029353135 @default.
• W2090260782 hasRelatedWork W2080531066 @default.
• W2090260782 hasRelatedWork W2135606630 @default.
• W2090260782 hasRelatedWork W2412665352 @default.
• W2090260782 hasRelatedWork W2474877960 @default.
• W2090260782 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2090260782 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W2090260782 hasRelatedWork W3031052312 @default.
• W2090260782 hasRelatedWork W3032375762 @default.
• W2090260782 hasVolume "45" @default.
• W2090260782 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2090260782 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2090260782 magId "2090260782" @default.
• W2090260782 workType "article" @default.