Recent work has suggested there was no association between grades of doctors and the proportion of errors categorised as significant or higher [ 8] when correcting for types of prescription and ward speciality.
An agreement had therefore been reached that chickenpox be included in future summaries as a 'Significant' problem and it had been re-categorised as 'Significant' ever since.
Study results were categorised as statistically significant (p < 0.05) or non-significant in 19 studies, and a wide range of different methods were used to categorise study results as, for example, positive versus negative, confirmatory versus inconclusive, striking versus unimportant.
Thirty-six SNPs had a maximum percentage variance below 6.3% and these will be categorised as without significant QTL.
Patients were classified into two groups on the basis of their GDS scores: hip fracture patients with a GDS score of 5 or less were classified as non-depressed (HF; hip fracture only), those with a score of 6 or greater were categorised as having significant depressive symptoms (HF + D; Hip fracture patients with depressive symptoms).
The other three studies categorised age, and reported significant odds ratios for all categories.
Categorised covariates that were significant in univariate analysis were entered simultaneously into the multivariate model.
Such a dataset allowed us to assess whether any of the populations/lineages sampled deserve to be categorised as an evolutionarily significant unit.
The proportion of errors categorised with severity as significant or higher by prescriber grade were as follows: all prescribers 58.0%, newly qualified 51.2%, junior 60.8%, mid grade 66.4%, senior 57.6% (χtrend p<0.001 for univariate analysis, although this association disappeared when corrected for other potential confounders; table 3).
However, non-statistically significant heterogeneity, categorised as low, between studies at high risk, which mainly comprised studies with research misconduct or duplicate publication bias, and those at low or unclear risk of bias, was present for the comparisons of human albumin with control or colloid fluids and represented only around 150 patients (online supplement).
