ABSTRACT
Statistical aspects need particular attention in reporting on drug studies in migraine. It is important to report on all patient and disease characteristics which have contributed to the diagnosis and on all variables used for the evaluation of the result; the use of median values, accompanied by the extremes, is recommended in this context. Comparability of the study groups should be examined and possibly repeated after exclusion of the defaulters, if their number is substantial. As regards the presentation of the results, it does not suffice to give p values only: the magnitude of the response should be given and the use of techniques estimating the reliability of this magnitude (e.g. confidence intervals) and/or its reproducibility (e.g. power calculations) is recommended. An analysis of three unrelated groups of migraineurs demonstrates that most pertinent variables show a non-Gaussian distribution, and this includes the distribution of treatment results. For this reason, the use of nonparametric tests is advocated.
Subject(s)
Clinical Trials as Topic/methods , Data Interpretation, Statistical , Migraine Disorders/drug therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Child , Humans , Middle Aged , Migraine Disorders/physiopathology , Patient ComplianceABSTRACT
A system for machine assisted karyotyping and chromosome analysis has been developed. The system uses a drum- or TV-scanner as input device, runs provisionally in 32 K memory, and also allows human interaction on several stages. The accuracy with which banded chromosomes are karyotyped depends strongly on the type of classifier and varies from 40 up to 80%. The accuracy of the human assisted classifier (98%) comes close to that of a skilled technician (99.5%) using manual chromosomal analysis. Due to technical and memory limitations, the time necessary for the karyotyping of one cell is too long and depends on the interaction time; however karyotyping within 5 min, including human interaction, will be possible in the near future.
