5 citations
,
October 2008 in “Australasian Journal of Dermatology” This review aims to help medical practitioners understand inferential statistical methods to critically evaluate clinical trial design and analyses, but it doesn’t present new research findings.
August 2025 in “International Journal of Research in Dermatology” This review systematically analyzed 22 clinical trials on hair care, finding that while most studies employed appropriate statistical methods, significant inconsistencies in reporting test assumptions and effect sizes may hinder reproducibility, highlighting a need for better standardization and transparency in these research practices.
4 citations
,
April 2018 in “Clinical microbiology and infection” This article examines the limitations of using large databases for epidemiological research, highlighting the risk of spurious associations due to data quality issues and insufficient adjustment for multiple comparisons, and reports no new results.
October 2008 in “Australasian Journal of Dermatology” This article provides a multiple-choice quiz based on dermatology information but shares no new research findings.
1 citations
,
October 2019 in “Medicina UPB” This review guides readers on how to critically evaluate multiple treatment comparison meta-analyses, offering insights for interpreting and communicating these studies but reporting no new results.