Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comment
. 2012 Jun;55(3):207-11.
doi: 10.1503/cjs.010211.

Users' Guide to the Surgical Literature. Understanding confidence intervals

Margherita Cadeddu, Forough Farrokhyar, Carolyn Levis, Sylvie Cornacchi, Ted Haines, Achilleas Thoma; Evidence-Based Surgery Working Group
Comment

Users' Guide to the Surgical Literature. Understanding confidence intervals

Margherita Cadeddu et al. Can J Surg. 2012 Jun.
No abstract available

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Results of 4 hypothetical studies for comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for hernia repair. A 10-mm improvement in the postoperative pain score is considered the smallest benefit that would warrant a change in practice (double line). The single line on the y axis represents the null hypothesis of no difference. For each study, the dot represents the mean difference (point estimate), and the line represents the boundaries of the 95% confidence intervals around the point estimate. MID = minimum important difference.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Results from the study by Karounis and colleagues. A 12-mm difference in visual analogue scale (VAS) score of cosmesis was an a priori minimum important difference (MID; double line) by the authors. The single line is the null hypothesis of no difference in mean VAS of cosmesis. The dot on the horizontal line represents the mean difference of 13 mm, and the line represents the 95% confidence interval of 0.61–25.4 mm.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment on

References

    1. Altman DG. Why we need confidence intervals. World J Surg. 2005;29:554–6. - PubMed
    1. Greenfield ML, Kuhn JE, Wojitys EM. A statistics primer. Confidence intervals. Am J Sports Med. 1998;26:145–9. - PubMed
    1. Karounis H, Gouin S, Eisman H, et al. A randomized, controlled trial comparing long-term outcomes of traumatic pediatric lacerations repaired with absorbable plain gut versus nonabsorbable nylon sutures. Acad Emerg Med. 2004;11:730–5. - PubMed
    1. Luck RP, Flood R, Eyal D, et al. Cosmetic outcomes of absorbable versus nonabsorbable sutures in pediatric facial lacerations. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2008;24:137–42. - PubMed
    1. Monteiro GC, Ejnisman B, Andreoli CV, et al. Absorbable versus nonabsorbable sutures for the arthroscopic treatment of anterior shoulder instability in athletes: a prospective randomized study. Arthroscopy. 2008;24:697–703. - PubMed