Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

631
Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
631
Relative Risk01:12

Relative Risk

2.5K
Relative risk (RR) is a statistical measure commonly used in epidemiology to compare the likelihood of a particular event occurring between two groups. This metric is important for evaluating the relationship between exposure to a specific risk factor and the probability of a particular outcome. It plays a crucial role in medical research, public health studies, and risk assessment. Relative risk quantifies how much more (or less) likely an event is to occur in an exposed group compared to an...
2.5K
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups01:20

Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups

734
Survival analysis is a cornerstone of medical research, used to evaluate the time until an event of interest occurs, such as death, disease recurrence, or recovery. Unlike standard statistical methods, survival analysis is particularly adept at handling censored data—instances where the event has not occurred for some participants by the end of the study or remains unobserved. To address these unique challenges, specialized techniques like the Kaplan-Meier estimator, log-rank test, and...
734
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding01:25

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding

606
Confounding is a critical issue in epidemiological studies, often leading to misleading conclusions about associations between exposures and outcomes. It occurs when the relationship between the exposure and the outcome is mixed with the effects of other factors that influence the outcome. Given that, addressing confounding is of high importance for drawing accurate inferences in research.
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
606
Hazard Rate01:11

Hazard Rate

537
The hazard rate, also known as the hazard function or failure rate, is a statistical measure used to describe the instantaneous rate at which an event occurs, given that the event has not yet happened. From a probabilistic perspective, it represents the likelihood that a subject will experience the event in a very small time interval, conditional on surviving up to the beginning of that interval. In terms of frequency, the hazard rate can be viewed as the ratio of the number of events to the...
537
Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Individual and Population Analysis01:23

Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Individual and Population Analysis

360
Mechanistic models are utilized in individual analysis using single-source data, but imperfections arise due to data collection errors, preventing perfect prediction of observed data. The mathematical equation involves known values (Xi), observed concentrations (Ci), measurement errors (εi), model parameters (ϕj), and the related function (ƒi) for i number of values. Different least-squares metrics quantify differences between predicted and observed values. The ordinary least...
360

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Variation in emergency department attendances and acute hospital admissions for ambulatory emergency care: a retrospective analysis of routinely collected NHS data across England.

BMJ open·2026
Same author

Investigating differences in the implementation and experience of the Enhanced Health in Care Homes Framework in England: a qualitative protocol for the Understanding Variation in Admissions from Care Homes (UVAC) study.

BMJ open·2026
Same author

Hepatic metastasis surveillance in uveal melanoma: a retrospective cohort study from a UK tertiary centre (2006-2022).

British journal of cancer·2026
Same author

Hormone signaling and immune programs define differential endocrine responsiveness in high-risk breast tissue.

bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology·2026
Same author

Sample size calculations for pilot cluster-randomised controlled trial: a review 2010-2020.

Pilot and feasibility studies·2026
Same author

Winter all year round in urgent and emergency care: a large retrospective analysis of routinely collected NHS data across England, 2021-2022.

BMC health services research·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 6, 2026

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.3K

Direct risk standardisation: a new method for comparing casemix adjusted event rates using complex models.

Jon Nicholl1, Richard M Jacques, Michael J Campbell

  • 1School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK. j.nicholl@shef.ac.uk.

BMC Medical Research Methodology
|October 31, 2013
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

A new direct risk standardisation method offers fairer comparisons between healthcare centres by adjusting for patient risk factors. This approach is as straightforward as existing methods and overcomes limitations of complex casemix adjustments.

More Related Videos

Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data
04:57

Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data

Published on: October 23, 2020

9.9K
Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
07:31

Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack

Published on: May 15, 2020

8.4K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 6, 2026

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.3K
Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data
04:57

Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data

Published on: October 23, 2020

9.9K
Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
07:31

Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack

Published on: May 15, 2020

8.4K

Area of Science:

  • Health Services Research
  • Biostatistics
  • Epidemiology

Background:

  • Healthcare outcome comparisons are often confounded by patient casemix differences.
  • Conventional direct and indirect standardisation methods face challenges with large, complex casemix adjustment models.
  • Existing methods can lead to practically impossible calculations or unfair comparisons.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To introduce and evaluate a novel method for direct risk standardisation (DRS).
  • To overcome limitations of conventional standardisation techniques in healthcare outcome comparisons.
  • To enable fair and accurate performance assessments across different healthcare centres.

Main Methods:

  • Estimated individual risk using a casemix model consistent with indirect standardisation.
  • Defined risk categories and calculated event rates within each category for comparative centres.
  • Applied a weighted sum of risk category-specific event rates, validated on large datasets and complex models.

Main Results:

  • Direct risk standardisation (DRS) revealed substantial differences compared to conventional direct casemix standardisation.
  • DRS results closely mirrored Standardised Mortality Ratios (SMRs) from indirect standardisation.
  • Similar standard errors were observed between DRS and SMRs.

Conclusions:

  • Direct risk standardisation is a straightforward method, comparable to conventional techniques.
  • DRS ensures fair performance comparisons and accommodates continuous casemix covariates.
  • The method is recommended when conventional standardisation risks unfair comparisons, offering similar statistical precision to SMRs.