The effect of variation in methodology on the outcome of osteoarthritic studies

Bibliographic Data

ID7809707
AuthorsPatricia S Bridges (Queens College, CUNY, corresponding author)
Year1993
Volume3
Issue4
Pages289-295
Publication date1993-12-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueInternational Journal of Osteoarchaeology (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1047-482X • E-ISSN: 1099-1212
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1002/oa.1390030407
OpenAlexW2078471032
LanguageEN
Citations received8
References cited11

There is a great deal of variability in how osteoarthritis is scored and analysed. This paper compares several commonly used techniques of data presentation and analysis, using a prehistorical skeletal sample from the southeastern USA. It finds that these methodologies result in greatly different outcomes, not only in the overall frequencies of lesions, but also in the statistical findings and in which joints apparently have the most arthritis. It is unlikely that a consensus will quickly develop on how to deal with osteoarthritic lesions, owing to widespread disagreements on even such basics as scoring. In the interim, the best way to ensure comparability of studies is to present the most complete and least manipulated data possible, along with easy‐to‐interpret summary scores

Alternative medicine · Comparability · Econometrics · Geography · Interim · Osteoarthritis · Pathology · Computer Science · Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies · Mathematics · Medicine

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub