Sentence examples for prognostic confounders from inspiring English sources

Although comparison of the two studies may be confounded due to differences in patient selection, most known prognostic confounders favoured the gemcitabine cohort (Table 4).

Analysis of the effects of likely prognostic confounders (e.g. ASA) is planned, using a suitable comprehensive data set.

In fact, there existed both favourable and adverse prognostic confounders that may have biased the results towards either the PORT or non-PORT group.

Although the post hoc comparison with our previous study is open to patient selection bias, a comparison of patient and study characteristics showed that most known prognostic confounders favoured the earlier gemcitabine cohort.

After adjusting for known prognostic confounders, KLK15 was found to be a significant prognostic factor for both PFS and OS in the subgroup of patients with low grade (grade I II) and those with ER-negative and PR-negative tumours.

It should also be noted that there were differences in the adjustment for other prognostic factors (confounders) used across studies (Supplementary Table S2).

For example, availability of IPD does not overcome poor quality of primary studies; IPD may not be available from every study desired; and studies may differ in the set of prognostic factors (confounders) recorded and their method of measurement.

Possible prognostic factors and confounders are selected based on previous research [ 4].

Logistic regression analysis yielded an odds ratio of 2.790 (95%% confidence interval, 1.155-6.743; P = 0.023) for the effect of treatment once adjustments were made for demographic, prognostic and disease confounders.

Study quality was evaluated using the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool, which considers six potential domains of bias: inclusion, attrition, prognostic factor measurement, confounders, outcome measurement, and analysis and reporting [ 18].

Figure  4 illustrates two paradigmatic cases recorded under treatment (Fig.  4).> -wrap-foot> ITT = intention-to-treat, n = number of eyes, PP = per-protocol The logistic regression yielded an odds ratio (OR) of 2.790 (95 % CI, 1.155 6.743; P = 0.023) for the effect of treatment once adjustments were made for demographic, prognostic and disease confounders, as described in Table  4.