Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Biostatistic Assignment Point Interval Estimation
Biostatistic Assignment Point Interval Estimation
1. In the Figure 1, please examine the number of subjects enrolled and analyzed for each type of
intervention. What is your comment regarding the results of randomization of this study?
How did investigators try demonstrate that high drop-out did not suggest any bias? Read
table 1 for your justification. Why?
- Regarding from this article, there is 482 women referred were screened for eligibility but the
total number of subject enrolled in this study only 230 and the number of subject declined to
participated is 225. And we used 230 sample to participated and have willingness to join in this
study.
- The intervention for all subject in this article, woman’s are allocated to the dietary intervention
received a HUMBA Handbook with information about healthy nutritious foods, recipes,
unhealthy drinks, managing cravings and ways to be more physically active. Then, they received
4 homebased education sessions by a community professional health workers. This included
behavior change techniques to promote healthy eating and setting SMARTER goals (specific,
measurable, action-oriented, realistic, timed, evaluated, and reviewed). While, subsequent
intervention visits, community health workers plotted the woman’s weight on a personal
pregnancy weight gain chart and provided feedback and positive reinforcement for goals
achieved. A dietitian developed an operation manual and provided oversight. Dietary
intervention visits were aimed to be completed before the 26 until 28 weeks HUMBA study 75-g
oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). Women in the dietary intervention also received
motivational text messages 3 times weekly from randomization until birth. Content of the
messages was designed to complement dietary education with some worded as if from the baby
to the mother, eg, “Mum, remember to read food labels.” Women could elect to stop receiving
texts at any time. Women allocated to probiotics group received capsules containing
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and Bifidobacterium lactis BB12 (minimum dose 6.5 109 colony
forming units. Women in the placebo group received identical capsules containing
microcrystalline cellulose and dextrose anhydrate. Women were instructed to take 1 capsule
(probiotic or placebo) daily until birth. All participants continued routine antenatal care.
This is assessment or intervention for participant in this study
Why in this study didn’t have any bias while there is 225 participant declined or in this study
have a high drop out ?
- Because they are considering about the number of loss to follow up, while in this study
allow to consider 10% loss to follow up and the researcher considering about the
minimum sample size in this study to keep their research have a valid data and to prevent
bias data. Most statisticians agree that the minimum sample size to get any kind of
meaningful result is 100 but the total sample size in this study still above more than 100
or 230 sample.
- The best way to avoid selection bias is to use randomization. Randomizing selection of
beneficiaries into treatment and control groups, for example, ensures that the two groups
are comparable in terms of observable and unobservable characteristics. In this study of
course use randomization technique to prevent any selection bias too. While in this study
we divided into 2 group and we were choosed the sample with randomization technique
between two group ( group control and intervention control)
Yes, they have already conducted a proper randomization because Eligible women were
allocated randomly by the research midwife using a web-based randomization program
(http://randomize.net) using random permuted blocks of 4-8 participants, stratified by BMI
(30 to < 35 or >35 kg.m2), to dietary intervention and probiotic or placebo capsules or routine
dietary advice and probiotic or placebo capsules. Participants, researchers, and data analysts
were blinded to probiotic and placebo allocation. Participants in the dietary intervention
could not be blinded but researchers collecting and analyzing outcome data were unaware of
the dietary treatment allocation.
This is a a graphic that I put from journal, whil the researcher applied randomized control
trial between group control and group intervention, fro group intervention we want to do
intervention about allocated dieteray intervention and allocated probiotic capusles and other
than we want to compare with maternal woman allocated to routine dietary advice and
allocated with placebo capsules .
Allocation
Allocated to Routine Dietary
Allocated to Dietary Intervention Advice
n = 116 n = 114
Analysis
Allocation
Allocated to probiotic Allocated to placebo
capsules capsules
(n=115) (n=115)
Analysis
3. Please refer to Table 1. Create similar table but change the standard deviations to 90%
confidence intervals instead.
Table 1. Comparison between women who consented or declined to participate with 95% CI
Table 1. Comparison between women who consented or declined to participate with 90% CI
4. Write your reading for 90% confidence intervals in a plain language so that non-statistician
can understand the meaning.
We confident 90% that the values of the result will fall between the upper and lower limit if
the procedure of research is repeated again in the population. For example we want to
interpretation the variable height in this study. We confident 90% from the height variable in
this study while the result from height value will fall between 165.9 up to 166.8 if the
procedure of research will repeated again in the population or in similar think It also tells us
about how stable the estimate is. A stable estimate is one that would be close to the same
value if the survey were repeated. If repeated samples were taken and the 90% confidence
interval was computed for each sample, 90% of the intervals would contain the population
mean. A 90% confidence interval has a 0.90 probability of containing the population mean.
90% of the population distribution is contained in the confidence interval. For example the
maternal age variable in this study use 90% confidence interval while it means we confidence
90 % the maternal age in this population would contain maternal age in this population
between 28.17up to 29.4.
5. Please pay special attention on the 90% confidence interval of between-group differences for
the each type of baseline variables. What is your comment? What is your conclusion on
randomization after you read this article.
Randomization eliminates accidental bias, including selection bias, and provides a base for
allowing the use of probability theory. Randomization in an experiment means random
assignment of treatments. This way we can eliminate any selection possible biases that may arise
in the experiment. And also randomization in an experiment is important because it minimizes
bias responses. Random allocation is a technique that chooses individuals for treatment groups
and control groups entirely by chance with no regard to the will of researchers or patients'
condition and preference. This allows researchers to control all known and unknown factors that
may affect results in treatment groups and control groups.
Random Sequences
Generation
Simple randomization
Sealing with envelope or
Block randomization
eCRF or Drug Preparation
Stratified random
Procedure
Blinding for patient Double Blind
Rgearding from this article, participants, researchers, and data analysts were blinded to probiotic
and placebo allocation. Participants in the dietary intervention could not be blinded but
researchers collecting and analyzing outcome data were unaware of the dietary treatment
allocation. Women allocated to probiotics ( include group intervention) received capsules
containing Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and Bifidobacterium lactis BB12 (minimum dose 6.5 x
109 colony forming units). Women in the placebo group received identical capsules containing
microcrystalline cellulose and dextrose anhydrate. Women were instructed to take 1 capsule
(probiotic or placebo) daily until birth. All participants continued routine antenatal care. From
illustration like that we knew while this study have a plan and make a consideration about
randomization technique and were apply blinding aspect between participant and researchers.
APPENDIX
. cii 230 28.8 5.7, level(90)