Advertisement

Evaluating Ophthalmic Literature

  • Dan Eisenberg
  • Paul N. Schacknow
Chapter

Abstract

Over the past two decades, we have heard an increasing demand for practicing evidence-based medicine. The medical literature is the core of our knowledge base in ophthalmology. The so-called “hierarchy of evidence” has caused much unresolved controversy about the nature of evidence that is truly most relevant for the practice of glaucoma. While systematic reviews and meta-analyses synthesize the information in a broad range of studies, the highest level of basic research is still considered the “randomized clinical trial (RCT).”

Keywords

Null Hypothesis Central Corneal Thickness Cystoid Macular Edema Common Error Nominal Data 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Eddy DM, Billings J. The quality of medical evidence: implications for quality of care. Health Aff (Millwood). 1988;7(1):19–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sackett DL. Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents. Chest. 1986;89:2s-3s.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Guyatt GH, Tugwell P. Clinical Epidemiology: A Basic Science for Clinical Medicine. London: Little, Brown; 1991.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sackett DL, Richardson WS, Rosenberg WMC, Haynes RB. Evidence-Based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM. London: Churchill-Livingstone; 1996.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Sinclair JC, Hayward R, Cook DJ, Cook RJ. Users’ guides to the medical literature. IX. A method for grading health care recommendations. JAMA. 1995;274:1800–1804.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Available at: http://ophsource.org/periodicals/ophtha/authorinfo. Accessed April 8, 2009.
  7. 7.
    Salsburg D. The Lady Tasting Tea: How Statistics Revolutionized Science in the Twentieth Century. New York: W. H. Freeman & Co; 2001.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fisher RA. Statistical Methods for Research Workers. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd; 1925.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heisenberg W. Physikalische Prinzipien der Quantentheorie. Leipzig: Hirzel. English translation: The Physical Principles of Quantum Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1930.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Adair G. The Hawthorne effect: a reconsideration of the methodological artifact. J Appl Psychol. 1984;69(2):334–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    David FN. Games, Gods & Gambling: A History of Probability and Statistical Ideas. unabridged ed. Mineola, NY: Dover; 1998.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Malmuth M. Gambling Theory and Other Topics. 6th ed. Las Vegas, NV: Two Plus Two Publishing; 2004.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rice J. Mathematical Statistics and Data Analysis. 2nd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co.; 1995.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Colton T, Ederer F. The distribution of intraocular pressure in the general population. Surv Ophthalmol. 1980;25(3):123–129.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kass MA, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ, et al, for the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study Group. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: a randomized trial determines that topical ocular hypotensive medication delays or prevents the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:701–713.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD, et al, for the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study Group. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:714–720.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pearson K. On the criterion that a given system of deviations from the probable in the case of a correlated system of variables is such that it can be reasonably supposed to have arisen from random sampling. Philos Mag.. 1900;50(5):157-175. Reprinted in K. Pearson 1956; 339–357.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yates F. Contingency table involving small numbers and the χ2 test. J R Stat Soc. 1934;1(suppl):217–235.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Krummenauer F, Storkebaum K, Dick HB. Graphic representation of data resulting from measurement comparison trials in cataract and refractive surgery. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2003;34:240–244.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dan Eisenberg
    • 1
  • Paul N. Schacknow
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.The Shepherd Eye CenterLas VegasUSA
  2. 2.Division of OphthalmologyNova Southeastern UniversityFort LauderdaleUSA
  3. 3.Visual Health CenterPalm SpringsUSA

Personalised recommendations