User profiles for D Altman
Douglas G AltmanCentre for Statistics in Medicine, University of Oxford Verified email at csm.ox.ac.uk Cited by 898399 |
The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration
… that were adjusted for, indicate how continuous variables were handled, and specify whether
the analysis was planned* or suggested by the data (Müllner M, Matthews H, Altman DG. …
the analysis was planned* or suggested by the data (Müllner M, Matthews H, Altman DG. …
The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials
… David Moher, Ken Schulz, and Doug Altman participated in regular conference calls, identified
participants, participated in the CONSORT meetings, and drafted the paper. David Moher …
participants, participated in the CONSORT meetings, and drafted the paper. David Moher …
CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs)
is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and …
is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and …
Understanding the US failure on coronavirus—an essay by Drew Altman
D Altman - BMJ: British Medical Journal, 2020 - JSTOR
… taken by the Trump administration, writes Drew Altman Drew Altman president and CEO …
Drew Altman earned his PhD in political science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and …
Drew Altman earned his PhD in political science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and …
The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
Flaws in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of randomised trials can cause the
effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s …
effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s …
ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions
Non-randomised studies of the effects of interventions are critical to many areas of healthcare
evaluation, but their results may be biased. It is therefore important to understand and …
evaluation, but their results may be biased. It is therefore important to understand and …
The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies
Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often
inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's …
inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's …
Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement
JM Bland, DG Altman - The lancet, 1986 - Elsevier
… If there is a consistent bias we can adjust for it by subtracting d from the new method. For
the PEFR data the mean difference (large meter minus small meter) is - 2 - 1 1/min and s is 38’ …
the PEFR data the mean difference (large meter minus small meter) is - 2 - 1 1/min and s is 38’ …
Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies.
OBJECTIVES: To consider methods and related evidence for evaluating bias in non-randomised
intervention studies. DATA SOURCES: Systematic reviews and methodological papers …
intervention studies. DATA SOURCES: Systematic reviews and methodological papers …
The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations
The PRISMA statement is a reporting guideline designed to improve the completeness of
reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Authors have used this guideline …
reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Authors have used this guideline …