Statistical issues in clinical trial design
Current Oncology Reports, ISSN: 1523-3790, Vol: 9, Issue: 1, Page: 55-59
2007
- 2Citations
- 11Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Review Description
This paper reviews some of the more salient recent developments in statistical aspects of clinical trial design methodology and suggests that more emphasis be placed on rigorous assessments of the new methodologies to place them in the context of existing methods, demonstrate their claimed advantages, and fully disclose their remaining limitations. Copyright © 2007 by Current Medicine Group LLC.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=33846163149&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf02951426; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17164048; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/BF02951426; http://www.springerlink.com/index/pdf/10.1007/BF02951426; http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/BF02951426; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf02951426; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02951426
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know