Critical appraisal of a cross sectional study using a STROBE checklist

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 14 окт 2024

Комментарии • 8

  • @243muhammadhasanat8
    @243muhammadhasanat8 Год назад +1

    The results were also lacking in description of demographic and social characteristics of the participants. It is a very significant oversight as hesitation to vaccines is often believed to correlate with socioeconomic and education status.

  • @239muhammadfaizaanakram4
    @239muhammadfaizaanakram4 Год назад

    Summary of some of the weaknesses pointed out:
    Title could have been more accurate.
    There was no clearly defined objective statement in the abstract. No exclusion criteria was mentioned. Sample size calculation was missing. Confounders and control of confounders missing.

    • @243muhammadhasanat8
      @243muhammadhasanat8 Год назад +1

      Funding was also not addressed

    • @243muhammadhasanat8
      @243muhammadhasanat8 Год назад +1

      Also no method for examination of subgroups and interactions was given

    • @239muhammadfaizaanakram4
      @239muhammadfaizaanakram4 Год назад +1

      @@243muhammadhasanat8 actually the funding point wasn't agreed upon during the discussion. A Dr later on mentioned that funding wasn't necessary for this type of study is it wasn't a contravention sort of study, I hope i heard it correct. That's why i skipped the funding part.

    • @239muhammadfaizaanakram4
      @239muhammadfaizaanakram4 Год назад

      @@243muhammadhasanat8 but yeah, you're right about no method for subgrouping and interactions....

    • @243muhammadhasanat8
      @243muhammadhasanat8 Год назад +1

      @@239muhammadfaizaanakram4 thanks for the correction