RESUMEN
With data and code sharing policies more common and version control more widely used in statistics, standards for reproducible research are higher than ever. Reproducible research practices must keep up with the fast pace of research. To do so, we propose combining modern practices of leadership with best practices for reproducible research in collaborative statistics as an effective tool for ensuring quality and accuracy while developing stewardship and autonomy in the people we lead. First, we establish a framework for expectations of reproducible statistical research. Then, we introduce Stephen M.R. Covey's theory of trusting and inspiring leadership. These two are combined as we show how stewardship agreements can be used to make reproducible coding a team norm. We provide an illustrative code example and highlight how this method creates a more collaborative rather than evaluative culture where team members hold themselves accountable. The goal of this manuscript is for statisticians to find this application of leadership theory useful and to inspire them to intentionally develop their personal approach to leadership.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Continuous pulse oximetry (Spo2) is a commonly utilized tool to obtain an indirect, noninvasive measurement of hemoglobin oxygen saturation. Difficulty obtaining measurement with Spo2 sensors can lead nurses to try off-label sites until they find placement that provides a signal. Currently, there is limited evidence to support this application. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of off-label placement of pulse oximetry sensors in comparison to on-label placement in adult cardiac intensive care patients. METHODS: Data were collected on 24 participants. At the time of a medically necessary arterial blood gas laboratory draws, 4 Spo2 measurements were gathered from an on-label finger sensor, an off-label finger sensor, an on-label ear sensor, and an off-label ear sensor. Results were analyzed using 4 Pearson correlation coefficients, Bland-Altman plots, and 2 linear mixed-effect models. RESULTS: Our study found that while both our on-label finger and off-label finger pulse oximetry sensor overestimated when compared to the arterial hemoglobin saturation (gold standard), there was greater overestimation found with the off-label placement. Though there was not a significant difference observed between the ear probe on the nose and the gold standard, figures examining off-label ear probe and gold standard measures show that, in lower ranges of oxygen saturation, the off-site probe substantially overestimates true oxygen saturation, while in higher ranges of oxygen saturation, the off-site ear probe underestimates true oxygen saturation. CONCLUSIONS: No changes should be made to the current practice of using pulse oximetry sensor placement.