elahism的部落格

標題:

幫忙一下..翻譯醫學術語急!(上)

• (173)活動公司-台南小吃-台南美食-
• 95年四技二專 化工的問題..謝謝
• 請問Michael Jordan在美國小聯盟成績如何-
• 威寶無線網卡499方案
• 我想換主機板 幫我介紹
• 本人於除息前(5.25)買入20000股紫金, 現在放的話, 是否會蝕好多呢--
• 4000蚊砌機list,,,!!認真的入
• 中信1616 which banks can take form
• 請問雛田跟鳴人告白是哪一集
• 中五數學概率題

此文章來自奇摩知識+如有不便請留言告知

發問:

Glossary of TermsMeta-analysis A quantitative method of combining and integrating the results of studies on the same topicDouble blind A study style where neither the study subjects or the individuals administering the treatment know which is the experimental or control groupRandom sample A method... 顯示更多 Glossary of Terms Meta-analysis A quantitative method of combining and integrating the results of studies on the same topic Double blind A study style where neither the study subjects or the individuals administering the treatment know which is the experimental or control group Random sample A method of selection of a population that ensures each member has an equal probability of being selected Controlled trial A study that minimizes potential influences on the dependent variable reduction in stool output. Results indicated that rice-based ORS was more effective that standard ORS solutions in reducing cholera diarrhea in children. However, both were equally effective in noncholera diarrhea. Critique of the Evidence The strengths of the first study by Bhan et al.(1995) include that it is a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial with a large sample size (n=439) and that it was conducted in variable settings, including 4 developed countries. A weakness of the study is the fact that the subject population was made up solely of male children, placing a gender bias on the trial. In the meta-analysis by Gavin Merrick, and Davidson(1996), the authors limited their search to MEDLINE and some field research. Additionally, the sample sizes in the clinical trials they evaluated were small, with 70 subjects or less. With small sample sizes, it may be difficult to generalize findings to the larger population of affected children. The researchers also assumed that the subjects were well-nourished because these clinical trials were conducted in developed countries.

最佳解答:

術語彙編結合和集成研究的結果階分析A 定量方法關於同樣題目雙的矇蔽A 兩者都不研究主題或個體執行治療知道的研究樣式哪些是實驗性或控制群隨意抽樣人口的選擇A 方法保證各名成員有一個相等的可能性是使對因變量的潛在的影響減到最小的選擇的受控試驗A 研究 對凳子產品的減少。結果表明, 標準ORS 解答在減少霍亂腹瀉對於兒童的rice-based ORS 是更加有效的。但是, 兩個是相等地有效的在noncholera 腹瀉。 證據的批評第一研究的力量由Bhan 和al.(1995) 包括, 它是隨機化, 雙盲, 受控試驗以大樣本大小(n=439) 並且它被舉辦了在易變的設置, 包括4 個發達國家。研究的弱點是事實附屬的人口單一地被彌補了男性孩子, 安置性別偏心在試驗。在階分析由Gavin Merrick, 和Davidson(1996), 作者對MEDLINE 和一些實際教學限制了他們的查尋。另外, 他們評估的樣本大小在臨床試驗是小, 與70 個主題或較少。以小樣本大小, 它也許難推斷研究結果對受影響的孩子的更多的人口。研究員並且假設, 主題well-nourished 因為這些臨床試驗進行了在發達國家。

其他解答:13413D6BADCE0D57