Difference between revisions of "Scientific Figures"
(Initial page edit) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== How to read scientific epidemiology reports? == | == How to read scientific epidemiology reports? == | ||
| + | <blockquote>"In epidemiologic research, [increases in risk of less than 100 percent] are considered small and are usually difficult to interpret. Such increases may be due to chance, statistical bias, or the effects of confounding factors that are sometimes not evident". Source: National Cancer Institute, Press Release, October 26, 1994</blockquote> | ||
| + | <blockquote>"As a general rule of thumb, we are looking for a relative risk of 3 or more before accepting a paper for publication." - Marcia Angell, editor of the New England Journal of Medicine</blockquote> | ||
| + | <blockquote>"My basic rule is if the relative risk isn't at least 3 or 4, forget it." - Robert Temple, director of drug evaluation at the Food and Drug Administration.</blockquote> | ||
| + | <blockquote>"An association is generally considered weak if the odds ratio [relative risk] is under 3.0 and particularly when it is under 2.0, as is the case in the relationship of ETS and lung cancer." - Dr. Kabat, IAQC epidemiologist</blockquote> | ||
Revision as of 00:20, 10 June 2012
How to read scientific epidemiology reports?
"In epidemiologic research, [increases in risk of less than 100 percent] are considered small and are usually difficult to interpret. Such increases may be due to chance, statistical bias, or the effects of confounding factors that are sometimes not evident". Source: National Cancer Institute, Press Release, October 26, 1994
"As a general rule of thumb, we are looking for a relative risk of 3 or more before accepting a paper for publication." - Marcia Angell, editor of the New England Journal of Medicine
"My basic rule is if the relative risk isn't at least 3 or 4, forget it." - Robert Temple, director of drug evaluation at the Food and Drug Administration.
"An association is generally considered weak if the odds ratio [relative risk] is under 3.0 and particularly when it is under 2.0, as is the case in the relationship of ETS and lung cancer." - Dr. Kabat, IAQC epidemiologist
