Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
[3] Using an audit protocol tool, it was identified that human entry errors range from 0.01% when entering donors' clinical follow-up details, to 0.53% when entering pathological details, highlighting the importance of an audit protocol tool in a medical research database.
A type II error, or a false negative, is the erroneous failure in bringing about appropriate rejection of a false null hypothesis. [1] Type I errors can be thought of as errors of commission, in which the status quo is erroneously rejected in favour of new, misleading information. Type II errors can be thought of as errors of omission, in which ...
The research literature showed that medical errors are caused by errors of commission and errors of omission. [28] Errors of omission are made when providers did not take action when they should have, while errors of commission occur when decisions and action are delayed. [28]
The false positive rate (FPR) is the proportion of all negatives that still yield positive test outcomes, i.e., the conditional probability of a positive test result given an event that was not present.
A reconstruction of the skull purportedly belonging to the Piltdown Man, a long-lasting case of scientific misconduct. Scientific misconduct is the violation of the standard codes of scholarly conduct and ethical behavior in the publication of professional scientific research.
In statistics, omitted-variable bias (OVB) occurs when a statistical model leaves out one or more relevant variables.The bias results in the model attributing the effect of the missing variables to those that were included.
Selection bias is the bias introduced by the selection of individuals, groups, or data for analysis in such a way that proper randomization is not achieved, thereby failing to ensure that the sample obtained is representative of the population intended to be analyzed. [1]
Research integrity or scientific integrity became an autonomous concept within scientific ethics in the late 1970s. In contrast with other forms of ethical misconducts, the debate over research integrity is focused on "victimless offence" that only hurts "the robustness of scientific record and public trust in science". [3]