{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,3,29]],"date-time":"2025-03-29T16:54:55Z","timestamp":1743267295136,"version":"3.32.0"},"reference-count":21,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,1,6]]},"DOI":"10.7759\/cureus.77047","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,1,7]],"date-time":"2025-01-07T06:09:14Z","timestamp":1736230154000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":1,"title":["The Limits of Inductive Reasoning for Clinical Evidence Appraisal: A Simulation Study"],"prefix":"10.7759","author":[{"given":"Steffen","family":"Mickenautsch","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Veerasamy","family":"Yengopal","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"297","reference":[{"key":"ref1","article-title":"Oxford Student's Dictionary of Current English","author":"Ruse C","year":"1990","unstructured":"Ruse C. Oxford Student's Dictionary of Current English. Oxford University Press, Budapest; 1990."},{"key":"ref2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.l4898","article-title":"RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials","volume":"366","author":"Sterne JA","year":"2019","unstructured":"Sterne JA, Savovi\u0107 J, Page MJ, et al.. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2019, 366:l4898. 10.1136\/bmj.l4898","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"ref3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2015.06.005","article-title":"ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed","volume":"69","author":"Whiting P","year":"2016","unstructured":"Whiting P, Savovi\u0107 J, Higgins JP, et al.. ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016, 69:225-234. 10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2015.06.005","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"key":"ref4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.i4919","article-title":"ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions","volume":"355","author":"Sterne JA","year":"2016","unstructured":"Sterne JA, Hern\u00e1n MA, Reeves BC, et al.. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016, 355:i4919. 10.1136\/bmj.i4919","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"ref5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.j4008","article-title":"AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both","volume":"358","author":"Shea BJ","year":"2017","unstructured":"Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, et al.. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ. 2017, 358:j4008. 10.1136\/bmj.j4008","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"ref6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026","article-title":"GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables","volume":"64","author":"Guyatt G","year":"2011","unstructured":"Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, et al.. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011, 64:383-394. 10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"key":"ref7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2174\/1574887114666190313170400","article-title":"Is the deductive falsification approach a better basis for clinical trial appraisal?","volume":"14","author":"Mickenautsch S","year":"2019","unstructured":"Mickenautsch S. Is the deductive falsification approach a better basis for clinical trial appraisal?. Rev Recent Clin Trials. 2019, 14:224-228. 10.2174\/1574887114666190313170400","journal-title":"Rev Recent Clin Trials"},{"key":"ref8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.4324\/9780203371107","article-title":"The Two Fundamental Problems of the Theory of Knowledge","author":"Popper K","year":"2012","unstructured":"Popper K. The Two Fundamental Problems of the Theory of Knowledge. Routlege, London and New York; 2012. 10.4324\/9780203371107"},{"key":"ref9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1162\/10636140152947786","article-title":"Error types","volume":"9","author":"Allchin D","year":"2001","unstructured":"Allchin D. Error types. Persp Sci. 2001, 9:38-58. 10.1162\/10636140152947786","journal-title":"Persp Sci"},{"key":"ref10","unstructured":"Catalogue of Bias Collaboration. (2023). Accessed. July 20, 2023: https:\/\/catalogofbias.org\/ ."},{"key":"ref11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2174\/157488709788186021","article-title":"A general framework for the evaluation of clinical trial quality","volume":"4","author":"Berger VW","year":"2009","unstructured":"Berger VW, Alperson SY. A general framework for the evaluation of clinical trial quality. Rev Recent Clin Trials. 2009, 4:79-88. 10.2174\/157488709788186021","journal-title":"Rev Recent Clin Trials"},{"key":"ref12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.21203\/rs.3.rs-3247631\/v1","article-title":"The limits of inductive reasoning for clinical evidence appraisal - a simulation study (Protocol)","author":"Mickenautsch S","year":"2023","unstructured":"Mickenautsch S, Yengopal V. The limits of inductive reasoning for clinical evidence appraisal - a simulation study (Protocol). Res Squ. 2023, 10.21203\/rs.3.rs-3247631\/v1","journal-title":"Res Squ"},{"key":"ref13","unstructured":"Random Number Generator. (2023). Accessed. July 29, 2023: https:\/\/www.calculator.net\/random-number-generator.html."},{"key":"ref14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1651-2227.2006.00179.x","article-title":"Understanding diagnostic tests 2: likelihood ratios, pre- and post-test probabilities and their use in clinical practice","volume":"96","author":"Akobeng AK","year":"2007","unstructured":"Akobeng AK. Understanding diagnostic tests 2: likelihood ratios, pre- and post-test probabilities and their use in clinical practice. Acta Paediatr. 2007, 96:487-491. 10.1111\/j.1651-2227.2006.00179.x","journal-title":"Acta Paediatr"},{"key":"ref15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2288-14-114","article-title":"Accuracy of the Berger-Exner test for detecting third-order selection bias in randomised controlled trials: a simulation-based investigation","volume":"14","author":"Mickenautsch S","year":"2014","unstructured":"Mickenautsch S, Fu B, Gudehithlu S, Berger VW. Accuracy of the Berger-Exner test for detecting third-order selection bias in randomised controlled trials: a simulation-based investigation. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014, 14:114. 10.1186\/1471-2288-14-114","journal-title":"BMC Med Res Methodol"},{"key":"ref16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2288-6-31","article-title":"Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data","volume":"6","author":"Zamora J","year":"2006","unstructured":"Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A, Khan K, Coomarasamy A. Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006, 6:31. 10.1186\/1471-2288-6-31","journal-title":"BMC Med Res Methodol"},{"key":"ref17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.271.9.703","article-title":"Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group","volume":"271","author":"Jaeschke R","year":"1994","unstructured":"Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, et al.. Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 1994, 271:703-707. 10.1001\/jama.271.9.703","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"ref18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0279645","article-title":"Extension of the Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an appraisal tool for prospective, controlled clinical therapy trials-A systematic review of meta-epidemiological evidence","volume":"17","author":"Mickenautsch S","year":"2022","unstructured":"Mickenautsch S, Rupf S, Mileti\u0107 I, Yengopal V. Extension of the Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an appraisal tool for prospective, controlled clinical therapy trials-A systematic review of meta-epidemiological evidence. PLoS One. 2022, 17:e0279645. 10.1371\/journal.pone.0279645","journal-title":"PLoS One"},{"key":"ref19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.4324\/9780203994627","article-title":"The Logic of Scientific Discovery","author":"Popper K","year":"2002","unstructured":"Popper K. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Routlege, London and New York; 2002. 10.4324\/9780203994627"},{"key":"ref20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.7759\/cureus.63581","article-title":"Selection bias risk in randomized controlled trials rated as low bias using Risk of Bias, Version 2 (RoB2) tool","volume":"16","author":"Mickenautsch S","year":"2024","unstructured":"Mickenautsch S, Yengopal V. Selection bias risk in randomized controlled trials rated as low bias using Risk of Bias, Version 2 (RoB2) tool. Cureus. 2024, 16:e63581. 10.7759\/cureus.63581","journal-title":"Cureus"},{"key":"ref21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.7759\/cureus.60346","article-title":"A test method for identifying selection bias risk in prospective controlled clinical therapy trials using the I2 point estimate","volume":"16","author":"Mickenautsch S","year":"2024","unstructured":"Mickenautsch S, Yengopal V. A test method for identifying selection bias risk in prospective controlled clinical therapy trials using the I2 point estimate. Cureus. 2024, 16:e60346. 10.7759\/cureus.60346","journal-title":"Cureus"}],"container-title":["Cureus"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cureus.com\/articles\/332623-the-limits-of-inductive-reasoning-for-clinical-evidence-appraisal-a-simulation-study","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,1,7]],"date-time":"2025-01-07T06:09:20Z","timestamp":1736230160000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cureus.com\/articles\/332623-the-limits-of-inductive-reasoning-for-clinical-evidence-appraisal-a-simulation-study"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2025,1,6]]},"references-count":21,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.7759\/cureus.77047","relation":{},"ISSN":["2168-8184"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2168-8184","type":"print"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2025,1,6]]}}}