PubMed · 9101664
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J Olivares. 1996. [Basic or applied research?].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9101664/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Outliers are observations which are very unlikely to be correct, as judged by independent observations or other prior information. Such unexpected observations are treated, effectively, as being more informative about possible models, so they can seriously impede the course of structure determination and refinement. The best way to detect and eliminate outliers is to collect highly redundant data, but it is not always possible to make multiple measurements of every reflection. For non-redundant data, the prior expectation given either by a Wilson distribution of intensities or model-based structure-factor probability distributions can be used to detect outliers. This captures mostly the excessively strong reflections, which dominate the features of electron-density maps or, even more so, Patterson maps. The outlier rejection tests have been implemented in a program, Outliar.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
After thoroughly searching the potentially relevant literature for a systematic review, reviewers face the sequential tasks of selecting studies for inclusion and appraising these studies. Methodical, impartial, and reliable strategies are necessary for these two tasks because systematic reviews are retrospective exercises and are therefore prone to both bias and random error. To plan for study selection, reviewers begin with a focused clinical question and choose selection criteria that reflect this question. A detailed selection protocol that specifies the study designs and publication status of articles to be included is often helpful. Selection criteria are itemized on customized forms and are used to examine each potentially relevant primary study, usually by two different reviewers. In planning the critical appraisal of included studies, reviewers decide which clinical and methodologic study features require documentation. After choosing methods for evaluating study quality, reviewers construct customized appraisal forms and an explicit protocol for the actual evaluation. Some of the techniques commonly used to minimize the potential for error in study appraisal include duplicate, independent examination; blinding to study results and other identifying features of each article; and correspondence with study authors to clarify issues. Ultimately, primary studies should be selected, appraised, and reported in sufficient detail to allow readers to judge the applicability of the review to clinical practice and to clarify the strength of the inferences that can be drawn from the review.