RESUMO
STUDY DESIGN: This single-center retrospective study analyzed patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) who underwent endoscopic facet joint denervation (EFJD) between April 2018 and May 2019. PURPOSE: This study was designed to investigate the effectiveness of EFJD in treating CLBP. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: CLBP is a challenging burden to healthcare systems worldwide. As up to 45% of cases originate from the lumbar facet joints, sufficient therapy strategies must be developed. EFJD offers a precise depiction of the dorsal medial ramus and the facet joint capsule. METHODS: In this study, 64 patients who underwent EFJD were included. The main outcome of interest was patients' Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain score, which was recorded at 3-time points (i.e., before operation and 6 weeks and 12 months after surgery). RESULTS: EFJD effectively reduced the VAS pain scores by 58% in the short term (6 weeks) and 38% in the long term (12 months). Patients with isolated facet joint osteoarthritis benefited more (p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: EFJD is a good treatment alternative for CLBP originating from the facet joints, particularly in patients with isolated facet joint osteoarthritis. Moreover, this method can address not only the dorsal medial ramus but also the surrounding tissue (e.g., facet joint capsule, facet joint effusion, and osteophytes) as the origin of CLBP.
RESUMO
The replicability of research findings has recently been disputed across multiple scientific disciplines. In constructive reaction, the research culture in psychology is facing fundamental changes, but investigations of research practices that led to these improvements have almost exclusively focused on academic researchers. By contrast, we investigated the statistical reporting quality and selected indicators of questionable research practices (QRPs) in psychology students' master's theses. In a total of 250 theses, we investigated utilization and magnitude of standardized effect sizes, along with statistical power, the consistency and completeness of reported results, and possible indications of p-hacking and further testing. Effect sizes were reported for 36% of focal tests (median r = 0.19), and only a single formal power analysis was reported for sample size determination (median observed power 1 - ß = 0.67). Statcheck revealed inconsistent p-values in 18% of cases, while 2% led to decision errors. There were no clear indications of p-hacking or further testing. We discuss our findings in the light of promoting open science standards in teaching and student supervision.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The initial preference task (IPT) is an implicit measure that has featured prominently in the literature and enjoys high popularity because it offers to provide an unobtrusive and objective assessment of self-esteem that is easy to administer. However, its use for self-esteem assessment may be limited because of weak associations with direct personality measures. Moreover, moderator effects of sample- and study-related variables need investigation to determine the value of IPT-based assessments of self-esteem. METHODS: Conventional and grey-literature database searches, as well as screening of reference lists of obtained articles, yielded a total of 105 independent healthy adult samples (N = 17,777) originating from 60 studies. Summary effect estimates and subgroup analyses for potential effect moderators (e.g., administration order, algorithm, rating type) were calculated by means of meta-analytic random- and mixed-effects models. Moreover, we accounted for potential influences of publication year, publication status (published vs. not), and participant sex in a weighted stepwise hierarchical multiple meta-regression. We tested for dissemination bias through six methods. RESULTS: There was no noteworthy correlation between IPT-based implicit and explicit self-esteem (r = .102), indicating conceptual independence of these two constructs. Effects were stronger when the B-algorithm was used for calculation of IPT-scores and the IPT was administered only once, whilst all other moderators did not show significant influences. Regression analyses revealed a somewhat stronger (albeit non-significant) effect for men. Moreover, there was no evidence for dissemination bias or a decline effect, although effects from published studies were numerically somewhat stronger than unpublished effects. DISCUSSION: We show that there is no noteworthy association between IPT-based implicit and explicit self-esteem, which is broadly consistent with dual-process models of implicit and explicit evaluations on the one hand, but also casts doubt on the suitability of the IPT for the assessment of implicit self-esteem on the other hand.
