2,992
回編集
差分
ナビゲーションに移動
検索に移動
→Orrell et al Adherence is not a barrier of ART S Africa AIDS 2003
6. Was there potential for misclassification of the outcome?
*It might have potential for misclassification of the outcome, because low adherence might influence virologic failure in one direction, which means outcome itself might turn to be an exposure.
7. Was there potential for misclassification of the exposure?
*I don't know details of ART at that time but guess dosing, mode of ART and number of tablets might confound each other in a certain extent.
8. What outcome measure is used and is this appropriate for this type of study?
*They measured adherence by tablet-returns but it may potentially miss another mode of adherence such as disposal of tablets at home.
*Measuring RNA copies is considered appropriate.
9. What other sources of bias are likely?
*In terms of adherence, selection/response bias exists that participants of clinical trial may be more health-conscious or be in lower socio-economical status and influence adherence of taking medicine.
10. Discuss the statistic
👉 did the analysis match the stated objectives?
*Researchers did multivariate analysis by Logistic regression and selected variables to include in the multivariate analysis by each of univariate analyses of variables. But at least I myself couldn't find on how many variables they did univariate analyses. If they did on more than 20 variables and set probability of risk of chance at 5%, variables they included in multivariate analysis might already have alpha-error.
👉 was a sample size calculation reported?al analysis strategy.
*I couldn't find sample size calculation in the article. This cohort study was derived from phase 3 clinical trial and it might be difficult to independently calculate appropriate sample size in the phase 3.
11. Discuss the tables (and figures if relevant). What is presented in each? Are the results presented clearly?
