The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Revisiting the relation between change and initial value: a review and evaluation
Abstract
The relation between initial disease status and subsequent change following treatment has attracted great interest in clinical research. However, statisticians have repeatedly warned against correlating/regressing change with baseline due to two methodological concerns known as mathematical coupling and regression to the mean. Oldham's method and Blomqvist's formula are the two most often adopted methods to rectify these problems. The aims of this article are to review briefly the proposed solutions in the statistical and psychological literature, and to clarify the popular misconception that Blomqvist's formula is superior to Oldham's method. We argue that this misconception is due to a failure to recognize that the heterogeneity of individual responses to treatment is a source of regression to the mean in the analysis of the relation between change and initial value. Furthermore, we demonstrate how each method actually answers different research questions, and how confusion arises when this is not always understood. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965
Practical Statistics for Medical Research
Altman, D. G. (1990) · doi:10.1201/9780429258589 · Cited by 10,668
Statistic Notes: Regression towards the mean
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1994) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.308.6942.1499 · Cited by 547
PITMAN, E. J. G. (1939) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/31.1-2.9 · Cited by 480
Cited by
McCall, D. O., McGartland, C. P., McKinley, M. C., Patterson, C. C., Sharpe, P., McCance, D. R., Young, I. S., & Woodside, J. V. (2009) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.108.831297 · Cited by 161
Fillingim, R. B., Slade, G. D., Greenspan, J. D., Dubner, R., Maixner, W., Bair, E., & Ohrbach, R. (2018) · Pain · doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001348 · Cited by 126
Antioxidants in Personalized Nutrition and Exercise
Margaritelis, N. V., Paschalis, V., Theodorou, A. A., Kyparos, A., & Nikolaidis, M. G. (2018) · Advances in Nutrition · doi:10.1093/advances/nmy052 · Cited by 84
Dopamine Agonists and the Suppression of Impulsive Motor Actions in Parkinson Disease
Wylie, S. A., Claassen, D. O., Huizenga, H. M., Schewel, K. D., Ridderinkhof, K. R., Bashore, T. R., & van den Wildenberg, W. P. M. (2012) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn_a_00241 · Cited by 76
Baldinger, P., Kranz, G. S., Haeusler, D., Savli, M., Spies, M., Philippe, C., Hahn, A., Höflich, A., Wadsak, W., Mitterhauser, M., et al. (2014) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.10.002 · Cited by 67
Havakeshian, S., & Mannion, A. F. (2013) · European Spine Journal · doi:10.1007/s00586-013-2822-5 · Cited by 63
Cagnacci, A., Zanin, R., Napolitano, A., Arangino, S., & Volpe, A. (2013) · Contraception · doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2013.04.003 · Cited by 21
Metadata
- Authors
- Tu, Y., & Gilthorpe, M. S.
- Venue
- Statistics in Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-03-08
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 443-457
- ISSN
- 0277-6715 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0258
- OpenAlex
- W2167724762
- Cited by
- 215
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 8.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
