Statistical reviewing for disability and rehabilitation

References

• Playfair W. Commercial and political atlas and statistical breviary. A facsimile of the third edition (1801). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2005
   Google Scholar
• Altman D G. Statistical reviewing for medical journals. Stat Med 1998; 17: 2661–2674
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson T. Statistical guidelines for medical journals. Stat Med 1984; 3: 97–99
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bailer J C, III, Hosteller E. Guidelines for statistical reporting in articles for medical journals: amplification and explanation. Ann Int Med 1988; 108: 266–273
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schumn L P, Fisher J, Thisted R A, Olak J. Clinical trials in general surgical methods: are methods better reported. Surgery 1999; 125: 41–45
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schriger D L, Aoroa S, Altman D G. The content of medical journal instructions for authors. Ann Emerg Med 2006; 48: 743–749
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altman D G, Gore S M, Gardner M J, Pocock S J. Statistical guidelines for contributors to medical journals. Br Med J 1983; 286: 1489–1493
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friberg S, Taube A, Sylvester R, Oesterling J E. Analysis and presentation. Clinical trials on prostate cancer. Urology 1997; 49(Suppl)54–65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curran-Everitt D, Benos D J. Guidelines for reporting statistics published by the American Physiological Association: the sequel. Am Physiol Assoc 2007; 31: 295–298
   Google Scholar
• Anonymous. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. International Committee for Medical Journal Editors. J Am Med Assoc 1997; 277: 927–934
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chappel A, Rogers A. Explicit guidelines for qualitative research: a step in the right direction, a defence of the ‘soft’ option, or a form of sociological imperialism. Fam Pract 1998; 15: 556–561
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Popay J, Rogers A, Williams G. Rationale and standards for the systematic review of qualitative literature in health services research. Qual Health Res 1998; 8: 341–351
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wittes J. Sample size calculations for randomized controlled trials. Epidemiol Rev 2002; 24: 39–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoenfeld D. Partial residual estimation for the proportional hazards regression. Biometrika 1982; 69: 239–241
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox D R. Some remarks on overdispersion. Biometrika 1983; 70: 269–274
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breslow N E. Extra-Poisson variation in log-linear models. Appl Stat 1984; 33: 38–44
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paul S R, Plackett R L. Inference sensitivity for Poisson mixtures. Biometrika 1978; 65: 591–602
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dean C B, Lawless J F. Tests for detecting overdispersion in Poisson regression models. J Am Stat Assoc 1989; 84: 467–472
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dean C B. Testing for overdispersion in Poisson and binomial regression models. J Am Stat Assoc 1992; 87: 451–457
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardner W, Mulvey E P, Shaw E S. Regression analyses of counts and rates: Poisson, overdispersed Poisson, and negative binomial models. Psychol Bull 1995; 118: 392–404
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sturman M C. Multiple approaches to analyzing count data in studies of individual differences: the propensity for type I errors, illustrated with the case of absenteeism prediction. Edu Psychol Bull 1999; 59: 414–430
   Google Scholar
• Williams D A. Extra-binomial variation in logistic linear models. Appl Stat 1983; 31: 144–148
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Copas J B. Regression, prediction and shrinkage (with discussion). J R Stat Soc Ser B 1983; 145: 311–354
   Google Scholar
• Mantel N. Why stepdown procedures in variable selection. Technometrics 1970; 12: 621–625
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murray G D. A cautionary note on selection of variables in discriminant analysis. Appl Stat 1977; 26: 246–250
   Google Scholar
• Miller A J. Selection of subsets of regression variables (with discussion). J R Stat Soc Ser A 1984; 147: 389–425
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poskitt D S, Tremayne A R. Determining a portfolio of linear time series models. Biometrika 1987; 74: 125–137
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Efron B, Tibshirani R J. Bootstrap methods for standard errors, confidence intervals, and other measures of statistical accuracy. Stat Sci 1986; 1: 54–77
   Google Scholar
• Sauerbrei W. The use of resampling methods to simplify regression models in medical statistics. Appl Stat 1999; 48: 313–329
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fairclough D L, Peterson H F, Chang V. Why are missing quality of life data a problem in clinical trials of cancer therapy?. Stat Med 1998; 17: 667–677
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Little R JA. A test of missing completely at random for multivariate data with missing values. J Am Stat Assoc 1988; 83: 1198–1202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazumdar S, Lui K S, Houck P, Reynolds C F, III. Intent-to-treat analysis for longitudinal clinical trials: coping with the challenge of missing values. J Psychiatr Res 1999; 33: 87–95
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Little R JA, Rubin D B. Statistical analysis with missing data. Wiley Interscience, Hoboken, NJ 2002
   Google Scholar
• Auleley G-R, Giraudeau B, Baron G, Maillefert J-F, Dougados M, Ravaud P. The methods of handling missing data in clinical trials influence sample size requirements. J Clin Epidemiol 2004; 56: 968–976
   Google Scholar
• Palmer J L. Analysis of missing data in palliative care studies. J Pain Symp Manage 2004; 28: 612–618
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houck P R, Mazumdar S, Koru-Sengul T, Tang G, Mulsant B H, Pollock B G, Reynolds G F, III. Estimating treatment effects from longitudinal clinical trial data with missing values: comparative analyses using different methods. Psychiatr Res 2004; 129: 209–215
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenland S, Finkle W D. A critical look at methods for handling missing covariates in epidemiologic regression. Am J Epidemiol 1995; 142: 1255–1264
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engels J M, Diehr J P. Imputation of missing longitudinal data: a comparison of methods. J Clin Epidemiol 2003; 56: 968–975
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molenberghs G. Editorial: What to do with missing data?. J R Stat Soc Ser A 2007; 170: 861–863
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groves R M, Couper M P. Nonresponse in household interviewer surveys. Series in probability and statistics, survey methodology section. Wiley, New York 1999
   Google Scholar
• Gardner M J, Altman D G. Confidence intervals rather than p-values: estimation rather than hypothesis testing. Br Med J 1986; 292: 746–750
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothman K J. No adjustments are needed for multiple testing. Epidemiology 1990; 1: 43–46
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Perneger T V. What's wrong with Bonferonni adjustments?. Br Med J 1998; 316: 1236–1238
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conneely K N, Boehnke M. So many correlated tests, so little time! Rapid adjustment of p values for multiple correlated tests. Am J Hum Genet 2007; 81: 1158–1168
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altman D G, Bland J M. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Br Med J 1995; 311: 485
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pocock S J, Clayton T C, Altman D G. Survival plots of time-to-event outcomes in clinical trials: good practice and pitfalls. Lancet 2002; 359: 1686–1689
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doll R. Sir Austin Bradford Hill: a personal view of his contribution to epidemiology. J R Stat Soc Ser A 1995; 158: 155–163
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armitage P. Fisher, Bradford Hill, and randomisation. Int J Epidemiol 2003; 32: 925–928
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill A B. The environment and disease: association or causation?. Proc R Soc Med (Lond) 1965; 58: 295–300
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips C V, Goodman K J. The missed lessons of Sir Austin Bradford Hill. Epidemiol Perspect Innov 2004; 1: 3
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Greenland S. Invited commentary: a critical look at some popular meta-analytic methods. Am J Epidemiol 1994a; 140: 290–296
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenland S. Can meta-analysis be salvaged?. Am J Epidemiol 1994b; 140: 783–787
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple graphical test. Br Med J 1997; 315: 629–634
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Senn S. Cross-over trials in clinical research2nd ed. Wiley, Chichester 2003
   Google Scholar
• Diggle P J, Heagerty P, Liang K-Y, Zeger S L. Analysis of longitudinal data2nd ed. University Press, Oxford 2003
   Google Scholar
• Senn S J. Covariate imbalance and random allocation in clinical trials. Stat Med 1989; 8: 467–475
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moher D, Schultz K F, Altman D. The CONSORT Statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. Lancet 2001; 357: 1191–1194
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell M K, Elbourne D R, Altman D G. CONSORT Statement to cluster RCTs. Br Med J 2004; 328: 702–708
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopewell S, Clark M, Moher D, Wagner E, Middleton P, Altman D G, Schulz K E. the CONSORT group. CONSORT for reporting randomized trials in journal and conference abstracts. Lancet 2008; 371: 281–283
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plint A C, Moher D, Morrison A, Schultz L, Altman D G, Hill C, Gaboury I. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Med J Aust 2006; 185: 263–267
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Elm E, Altman D G, Egger M, Pocock S J, Gotzsche P C. Vandenbroucke JP for the STROBE Initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol 2008; 61: 344–349
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matthews J NS, Altman D G, Campbell M J, Royston P. Analysis of serial measurements in medical research. Br Med J 1990; 300: 230–235
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rigby A S. Statistical methods in epidemiology. III. The odds ratio as an approximation to the relative risk. Disabil Rehabil 1999; 21: 145–151
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenhart C. Expressions of uncertainties of final results. Science 1968; 160: 1201–1204
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown G W. Standard deviation, standard error. Which standard should we use?. Am J Dis Childhood 1980; 136: 937–941
   Google Scholar
• Frontera W R, Grimby G, Basford J, Muller D, Ring H. Publishing in physical and rehabilitation medicine. Disabil Rehabil 2008; 30: 487–492
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feinstein A R. Clinical biostatistics. CV Mosby, St Louis 1977
   Google Scholar