Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Data Reporting”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 253 records · Page 14Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

[Standardization of the data reported in nasopharyngeal and fluoroscopy study of the velopharyngeal sphincter].

There is a certain global awareness to unify the reports of the findings with the Fiber Optic Endoscopy and The Fluoroscopy in the Velopharyngeal Sphincter. The evaluation must be made by specialists. Nasopharyngoscopy: The required equipment is the nasopharyngoscope with a source of light. A videotape is desirable although not necessary. The report must be descriptive and should arrive at precise conclusions. The following are described: 1) nasal phosae, 2) meatus, 3) the exit orifice of the Eustachian Tube, 4) oropharyx, 5) velopharyngeal sphincter (posterior and lateral pharyngeal walls, and the palatal velum), 6) the closing pattern (form, separate structure, at rest, and in phonation), and 7) larynx. Fluoroscopy: It is useful to evaluate the lateral pharyngeal walls as well as the level at which the velopharyngela sphincter closes. The fluoroscopy is not required in every combination instance. Nevertheless, when it is used, it must be in complement with the nasopharyngoscopy. The videotape is not indispensable. Frontal, lateral, and basal incidences must always be performed.

Endoscopy↗
PubMed2000

A review of the literature for whole-body FDG PET in the management of patients with melanoma.

BACKGROUND: A review and meta-analysis of the literature on the use of 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in the detection of recurrent melanoma was conducted. The goals were to evaluate the quality of data reporting and to determine the overall values for the sensitivity and specificity of whole body FDG PET and management changes. METHODS: Guidelines to evaluate reporting within articles were formulated based on the United States medical payer source criteria for assessing studies reporting information on the utilization of new medical technology. A meta-analysis was conducted using methodology described in the peer reviewed literature. RESULTS: Our MEDLINE PLUS search resulted in a universe of 89 total articles. Within these 89, 19 were categorized in our targeted content area of which 13 were selected for analysis in our targeted subset, with the remaining 70 covering 24 different related content areas. Five of 13 (38%) articles in the target subset reported data which was adequate for incorporation into modeling objectives based on PET sensitivity and specificity values, with 1 of 13 (8%) in the same target subset reporting data adequate for modeling based on change-in-management data. Through a meta-analysis of the 13 target articles we determined, within a 95% confidence level, an overall sensitivity of 92% (95% confidence level 88.41%-95.82%) and an overall specificity of 90% (95% confidence level 83.26%-96.05%) as calculated by number of lesions, for FDG PET detecting recurrent melanoma throughout the whole body. Furthermore, limited data available for change-in-management suggests an overall FDG PET directed change-in-management value of 22%. CONCLUSIONS: Our review suggests that improvements can be made to more effectively report the results of these FDG PET studies. The overall values determined through the meta-analysis indicate the potential benefits of using FDG PET as a diagnostic/management tool. Furthermore, these values should prove useful to assessing the cost effectiveness of utilizing FDG PET in the management of recurrent melanoma.

Confidence Intervals↗
PubMed2005

Validation study on self-reported height, weight, and blood pressure.

Self-report data were compared with actual recorded data on height, weight, and blood pressure during health examinations to check for validity. The subjects were 1,823 persons, ages 40-68 years. Pearson correlations for systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, height, weight, and Body Mass Index between data reported in 1993 and measurements made in 1991 were .63, .60, .96, .96, and .92, respectively. Pearson correlations for the same variables between the data reported in 1993 and the measurements made in 1992 were .73, .67, .97, .97, and .94, respectively. Self-reported values for height, weight, and Body Mass Index appear to be valid over years or so.

Adult↗