New Markers – too good to be true?

One thing that in-vitro diagnostics people know is that new markers never seem to turn out as good as the initial publications. This has now been studied and is available, here. Included in this analysis are CRP, prostate markers, and others. Ioannidis and Panagiotou compared the initial publication results with meta-analysis and larger study results and confirmed that the effects claimed in the initial publications were often found not to be as large in the larger study or meta-analysis.

If the initial study were unbiased, one would expect the larger studies would show greater effects half of the time and less effects the other half.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: