Statistics, logistics and ballistics
Most of the time, I hate stats. It’s one of my least favorite subjects. Frankly, I think most people would agree. But, it’s a necessary evil in this field. So, I put together a few points of logistical relevance so you don’t have to go ballistic on this stuff!
5 takeaway points for evaluating statistics and drug studies:
1-Even in a double-blind study, reported side effects can tip off the clinician as to whether the subject has received the placebo, or the actual treatment.
2-The placebo effect-is shown when a sugar pill is given to the control group and can lead to positive (and less likely negative) symptoms just simply by receiving something from a clinician. This speaks to the power of the mind.
3-Our mind can work against us, too, with the nocebo effect-setting someone up for possible negative side effects by telling them that “you may get all these side effects, or symptoms: lupus, scleroderma, blurred vision, dry mouth, and left foot paralysis.” It never fails that someone will report left foot paralysis!! As you may know there is not a single drug That’s the power of suggestion!
4-Here’s a great tip when deciding whether to read a study, or not. If your confidence interval is <1.0 it IS statistically significant!! If it includes 1.0, don’t read the study because it is NOT statistically relevant.
5-Risk ratio-is the point estimate used for cohort studies.
Posted on September 29, 2013, in psychiatry, psychology and tagged 5 takeaway points for evaluating statistics and drug studies, ballistics, cohort studies, confidence interval, logistics, nocebo effect, placebo effect, psychiatry, Psychology, research and test design, risk ratio, Statistics, stats. Bookmark the permalink. Leave a comment.