ORCID Profile
0000-0003-1525-6503
Current Organisations
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
,
University of Oxford
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 05-2009
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 28-09-2010
Publisher: Massachusetts Medical Society
Date: 19-06-2008
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMC080680
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2009
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date: 11-10-2013
Publisher: American College of Physicians
Date: 06-01-2015
DOI: 10.7326/M14-0698
Publisher: American Medical Association (AMA)
Date: 22-10-2012
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date: 04-04-2014
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 03-2013
DOI: 10.1136/ACUPMED-2013-010312
Abstract: In September 2012 the Acupuncture Trialists’ Collaboration published the results of an in idual patient data meta-analysis of almost 18 000 patients in high quality randomised trials. The results favoured acupuncture. Although there was little argument about the findings in the scientific press, a controversy played out in blog posts and the lay press. This controversy was characterised by ad hominem remarks, anonymous criticism, phony expertise and the use of opinion to contradict data, predominantly by self-proclaimed sceptics. There was a near complete absence of substantive scientific critique. The lack of any reasoned debate about the main findings of the Acupuncture Trialists’ Collaboration paper underlines the fact that mainstream science has moved on from the intellectual sterility and ad hominem attacks that characterise the sceptics’ movement.
Publisher: Mary Ann Liebert Inc
Date: 09-2008
Publisher: Paediatrician Publishers LLC
Date: 07-05-2023
Abstract: The TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for In idual Prognosis Or Diagnosis) Statement includes a 22-item checklist, which aims to improve the reporting of studies developing, validating, or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. The TRIPOD Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study regardless of the study methods used. This explanation and elaboration document describes the rationale clarifies the meaning of each item and discusses why transparent reporting is important, with a view to assessing risk of bias and clinical usefulness of the prediction model. Each checklist item of the TRIPOD Statement is explained in detail and accompanied by published ex les of good reporting. The document also provides a valuable reference of issues to consider when designing, conducting, and analyzing prediction model studies. To aid the editorial process and help peer reviewers and, ultimately, readers and systematic reviewers of prediction model studies, it is recommended that authors include a completed checklist in their submission. The TRIPOD checklist can also be downloaded from www.tripod-statement.org. This article is the translation in to Russian by Dr. Ruslan Saygitov (ORCID: 000-0002-8915-6153) from the original published in [Ann Intern Med. 2015 :W1-W73. doi: 0.7326/M14-0698 ].
Publisher: ECO-Vector LLC
Date: 17-10-2022
DOI: 10.17816/DD110794
Abstract: The TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for In idual Prognosis Or Diagnosis) Statement includes a 22-item checklist, which aims to improve the reporting of studies developing, validating, or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. The TRIPOD Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study regardless of the study methods used. This explanation and elaboration document describes the rationale clarifies the meaning of each item and discusses why transparent reporting is important, with a view to assessing risk of bias and clinical usefulness of the prediction model. Each checklist item of the TRIPOD Statement is explained in detail and accompanied by published ex les of good reporting. The document also provides a valuable reference of issues to consider when designing, conducting, and analyzing prediction model studies. To aid the editorial process and help peer reviewers and, ultimately, readers and systematic reviewers of prediction model studies, it is recommended that authors include a completed checklist in their submission. The TRIPOD checklist can also be downloaded from www.tripod-statement.org. For members of the TRIPOD Group, see the Appendix. This article is the translation in to Russian by Dr. Ruslan Saygitov (ORCID: 0000-0002-8915-6153) from the original published in [Ann Intern Med. 2015 162:W1-W73. doi: 10.7326/M14-0698 ].
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2018
Location: United States of America
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
No related grants have been discovered for Andrew Vickers.