A source of false findings in published research studies: Adjusting for covariates

JAMA Psychiatry

Volumn 72, Issue 10, 2015, Pages 961-962

  Kraemer, Helena Chmura ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE; EDITORIAL; EFFECT SIZE; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; HUMAN; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MEDICAL RESEARCH; POWER ANALYSIS; SAMPLE; STATISTICAL MODEL; TREATMENT OUTCOME; METHODOLOGY; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; STATISTICS;

HUMANS; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; RESEARCH DESIGN; STATISTICS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84943547699     PISSN: 2168622X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.1178     Document Type: Editorial

References (7)

1. Ioannidis JPA. Contradicted and initially stronger effects in highly cited clinical research. JAMA. 2005;294(2):218-228.
2. Ioannidis JPA.Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2005;2(8):e124.
3. Kraemer HC, Kupfer DJ. Size of treatment effects and their importance to clinical research and practice. Biol Psychiatry. 2006;59(11):990-996.
4. Kraemer HC, Blasey CM. Centring in regression analyses: a strategy to prevent errors in statistical inference. Int JMethods Psychiatr Res. 2004;13(3): 141-151.
5. Kraemer HC, Frank E, Kupfer DJ. Moderators of treatment outcomes: clinical, research, and policy importance. JAMA. 2006;296(10):1286-1289.
6. Grissom RJ, Kim JJ. Effect Sizes for Research: Univariate and Multivariate Applications. New York, NY: Routledge; 2012.
7. Cumming G. Understanding the New Statistics: Effect Sizes, Confidence Intervals, and Meta-analysis. New York, NY: Routledge; 2012.