Sentences with phrase «for selection bias not»

We also conducted the Berger - Exner test42 for selection bias not captured by observed baseline characteristics.

Not exact matches

Previous studies of the effect of breastfeeding on morbidity among full - term infants have not always accounted for selection bias that may result if infants who are breastfed are inherently healthier than bottle - fed infants.22 In the current study, the VLBW infants» ability to breastfeed did not reflect better health status as both human milk and infant formula were provided via gavage feeding especially during early enteral feedings.

These studies are at risk for selection bias both of cases and of control individuals and their results might be influenced by potential confounders such as other health behaviors that may be independently associated both with breastfeeding and childhood leukemia risk, although this is of course not limited to case - control studies.

Except for male sex, which was not a risk factor in study participants, the ORs obtained from participants were similar to those obtained from all eligible cases and controls, providing no evidence of a noticeable selection bias.

Although we could not find estimates of fan use in the US population, we examined the potential selection bias by evaluating characteristics associated with SIDS risks in study participants and nonparticipants in a previously published article.16 Using California birth certificate data, we compared the ORs for maternal age, maternal education, parity, birth weight, infant sex, and late initiation of prenatal care (> 5 months» gestation).

The researchers noted possible selection bias, as a number of participants contacted for the study did not complete initial surveys and link Cardiogram accounts.

First and foremost, this was not a randomized controlled trial, and there were inherent selection biases that can be controlled for but never completely eliminated.

By comparing the educational outcomes of students who scored just above the admissions threshold (and thus were very likely to attend) and just below the admissions threshold (who mostly did not attend), Dougherty is able to account for the selection bias that has plagued prior CTE research.

They explain that the challenges for researchers are that the school effect must be disaggregated from family background, and that their methods must account for «selection bias» — the likelihood that children whose parents choose a charter school are already different from those whose parents do not.

Also, because the assignment to the FTC is not random, the more positive effects they see for students participating for more years may, as they acknowledge, reflect selection bias; that is, any student who stays in the same school for more years is likely to have better outcomes.

The results in Table 10 support the notion that the observational study design does a good job of controlling for selection bias in the evaluation of charter effects (or that there is not much selection bias in the first place).

Second, beyond selection bias, we don't know if there are other factors that affect achievement that we are not accounting for that are systematically different between students in choice schools and students in traditional public schools.

This result confirms my hypothesis and corroborates other literature indicating that after accounting for selection bias, on the whole choice schools do not outperform traditional public schools.

Most crucially, and most ludicrously, WILL's study doesn't account for selection bias — differences between students whose parents and guardians decide to enroll them in voucher schools or charter schools and those who do not.

However, not only do these measures not account for the massive selection bias of those that enter no - excuses schools to start and then for those that actually stay, it also assumes testing as an absolute measure of learning and thinking.

, b) plays a role, but only within the 10 % stretch band, c) matters, but one can always find a portfolio's worth of low absolute valuation stuff (if one doesn't worry about the implied adverse selection bias that when everything else is pricey, the cheap stuff is much more likely to be cheap for a good reason), or d) something else?

For example, it suffers from selection bias, and it treats the model ensemble as a random sample (which it is not).

Because the memetic explanation for CAGW rests upon social and evolutionary fundamentals (e.g. the differential selection of self - replicating narratives, narrative alliances, the penetration of memes into the psyche causing secondary phenomena like motivated reasoning, noble cause corruption and confirmation bias etc.) it is not dependent upon politics or philosophies of any stripe, which tend to strongly color most «explanations» and typically rob them of objectivity.

Only those who are young and naive have any excuse for not knowing that there is rampant positive results and more importantly selection bias in most of science.

I'm still not positive which way to lean for jury selection, though, since all it takes is one side to research the candidates thoroughly and the other side to omit to do so and the result is a biased jury.

«This seems to be one of those rare cases where, through the [marshaling] of compelling evidence, a disgruntled athlete could actually demonstrate the appearance of bias, a flawed consideration of factors by the selection committee, and possibly undue pressure being placed on other members of a selection committee by an influential member, who was «on a mission'to impose his own conditions for inclusion on a team, even though those conditions were not requirements of the published selection considerations,» says Cohen.

The quasi-experimental design reduces spillover effects but does not eliminate the possibility of selection bias.41, 42 The use of prospectively identified control subjects was intended to minimize discrepancies in outcomes between the 2 designs.43 For some outcomes, as noted previously, the magnitude and direction of outcomes for intervention and control families at randomization and quasi-experimental sites were comparable, although they were statistically significant only at quasi-experimental sites and in the larger pooled sampFor some outcomes, as noted previously, the magnitude and direction of outcomes for intervention and control families at randomization and quasi-experimental sites were comparable, although they were statistically significant only at quasi-experimental sites and in the larger pooled sampfor intervention and control families at randomization and quasi-experimental sites were comparable, although they were statistically significant only at quasi-experimental sites and in the larger pooled sample.

The quasi-experimental design reduces spillover effects and makes it easier to implement the program, but does not eliminate the possibility of selection bias.35, 36 The use of prospectively defined controls at quasi-experimental sites likely contributed to minimized discrepancies in outcomes between randomization and quasi-experimental groups.37 For several parenting outcomes, such as discipline practices, findings were of similar magnitude and direction at randomization and quasi-experimental sites, but statistically significant at only quasi-experimental sites, where the sample size was larger; they were significant in the pooled sample, as well.