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

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

11.0K
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
11.0K
Fundamental Attribution Error01:14

Fundamental Attribution Error

13.8K
According to some social psychologists, people tend to overemphasize internal factors as explanations—or attributions—for the behavior of other people. They tend to assume that the behavior of another person is a trait of that person, and to underestimate the power of the situation on the behavior of others. They tend to fail to recognize when the behavior of another is due to situational variables, and thus to the person’s state. This erroneous assumption is...
13.8K
pH Scale02:41

pH Scale

79.9K
Hydronium and hydroxide ions are present both in pure water and in all aqueous solutions, and their concentrations are inversely proportional as determined by the ion product of water (Kw). The concentrations of these ions in a solution are often critical determinants of the solution’s properties and the chemical behaviors of its other solutes. Two different solutions can differ in their hydronium or hydroxide ion concentrations by a million, billion, or even trillion times. A common means of...
79.9K
Random Error01:04

Random Error

9.8K
Random or indeterminate errors originate from various uncontrollable variables, such as variations in environmental conditions, instrument imperfections, or the inherent variability of the phenomena being measured. Usually, these errors cannot be predicted, estimated, or characterized because their direction and magnitude often vary in magnitude and direction even during consecutive measurements. As a result, they are difficult to eliminate. However, the aggregate effect of these errors can be...
9.8K
Margin of Error01:27

Margin of Error

7.6K
The margin of error is also called the maximum error of an estimate. The margin of error is the maximum possible or expected difference between the observed sample parameter value and the actual population parameter value. For proportion, it is the maximum difference between the value of sample proportion obtained from the data and the true value of population proportion. As the true value of the population parameter is not known, the margin of error is calculated using the sample statistic.
7.6K
Critical Region, Critical Values and Significance Level01:16

Critical Region, Critical Values and Significance Level

13.4K
The critical region, critical value, and significance level are interdependent concepts crucial in hypothesis testing.
In hypothesis testing, a sample statistic is converted to a test statistic using z, t, or chi-square distribution. A critical region is an area under the curve in  probability distributions demarcated by the critical value. When the test statistic falls in this region, it suggests that the null hypothesis must be rejected. As this region contains all those values of the...
13.4K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Patterns of Variation in Botanical Supplement Use among Hispanics and Latinos in the United States.

Epidemiology (Sunnyvale, Calif.)·2026
Same author

ActiTect: a generalizable machine learning pipeline for REM sleep behavior disorder screening through standardized actigraphy.

NPJ digital medicine·2026
Same author

Reciprocal Relationship Between Cardiovascular Risk and Attainment of Blood Pressure and Cholesterol Targets in Users of a Mobile Health App.

High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension·2026
Same author

Influence of Gestational Age Measurement Technique on the Associations Between Maternal Characteristics and Birth Outcomes.

Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology·2026
Same author

Smartphone Sensor Battery Consumption: A Standardized and Reproducible Test Protocol.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same author

Correction: How do patients, medical assistants and physicians accept and experience tablet-based cognitive testing by medical assistants in general practice? - A qualitative study.

BMC primary care·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Feb 4, 2026

Production of High-Titer Recombinant Newcastle Disease Virus from Allantoic Fluid
07:24

Production of High-Titer Recombinant Newcastle Disease Virus from Allantoic Fluid

Published on: May 25, 2022

4.5K

Case study in major quotation errors: a critical commentary on the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.

Andreas Stang1,2, Stephan Jonas3, Charles Poole4

  • 1Director of the Center of Clinical Epidemiology, Institute of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, University Hospital of Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45147, Essen, Germany. andreas.stang@uk-essen.de.

European Journal of Epidemiology
|September 28, 2018
PubMed
Summary

Many systematic reviews misrepresent critiques of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Authors citing the critique often inaccurately portray it as supporting NOS use, indicating a failure to read the source material.

More Related Videos

Rescue of Recombinant Newcastle Disease Virus from cDNA
10:55

Rescue of Recombinant Newcastle Disease Virus from cDNA

Published on: October 11, 2013

20.3K
Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice
07:07

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

9.2K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Feb 4, 2026

Production of High-Titer Recombinant Newcastle Disease Virus from Allantoic Fluid
07:24

Production of High-Titer Recombinant Newcastle Disease Virus from Allantoic Fluid

Published on: May 25, 2022

4.5K
Rescue of Recombinant Newcastle Disease Virus from cDNA
10:55

Rescue of Recombinant Newcastle Disease Virus from cDNA

Published on: October 11, 2013

20.3K
Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice
07:07

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

9.2K

Area of Science:

  • Medical research methodology
  • Evidence-based medicine
  • Bibliometrics

Background:

  • The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) is widely used to assess observational study quality in systematic reviews.
  • A 2010 commentary criticized the NOS for arbitrary quality item definitions.
  • This commentary received significant citation, highlighting its impact on research evaluation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate how a critical commentary on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) has been cited in subsequent literature.
  • To identify inaccuracies in the citation and quotation of the commentary by systematic review authors.
  • To assess the role of journal reviewers and editors in ensuring citation accuracy.

Main Methods:

  • A random sample of 100 papers citing the 2010 commentary was analyzed.
  • Citation analysis focused on systematic reviews to determine quotation accuracy.
  • Web of Science was used to retrieve citation data.

Main Results:

  • 96% of the citing papers were systematic reviews.
  • 98% of indirect quotations misrepresented the commentary's stance, incorrectly suggesting it supported NOS use.
  • None of the systematic reviews quoted the commentary directly.

Conclusions:

  • A substantial majority of systematic review authors citing the commentary appear not to have read it.
  • Journal reviewers and editors failed to detect and correct widespread quotation errors.
  • Accurate reading and citation of sources are crucial for authors, reviewers, and editors to maintain research integrity.