DがPの予後改善に直接寄与しているかは不明であり(筆者も述べてはいるが)，OSのような予後を他因子と比較し、Dが予後を反映した独立因子として証明されない限り、以前の報告以上の有用性は評価できない。従ってこの結果をもって郭清術を行うべきというのは言い過ぎである．
統計解析の記述があまりにも簡潔すぎる印象です．
この文献は既存論文と比較し当雑誌に掲載するに値する，明らかな有用性は見いだせないと考える．筆者はDはCの構成要員と述べているが，図にCが独立して評価されており，定義が不明瞭．
Rating
53
Native
Translation / English
- Posted at 05 Feb 2017 at 17:40
It is unclear if D is directly contributing to the improved prognosis of P (the author also stated as such), but has been compared with other factors similar to the prognosis of OS, and as D hasn't been proven as an individual factor, we can't evaluate it as more useful than we previously thought. Therefore, with this result, it might be considered hasty to say that the purification operation should be undergone.
The description of the statistical analysis gives a far too simplistic impression.
This document deserves to be compared to existing thesis and published in this magazine. We think we will discover clearly it's usefulness. The author stated that D is Cs essential member, but in the illustration C is evaluated independently and the definition is obscure.
nakayama718 likes this translation
The description of the statistical analysis gives a far too simplistic impression.
This document deserves to be compared to existing thesis and published in this magazine. We think we will discover clearly it's usefulness. The author stated that D is Cs essential member, but in the illustration C is evaluated independently and the definition is obscure.
Rating
53
Native
Translation / English
- Posted at 05 Feb 2017 at 17:10
It is unknown whether D directly contributes to the improved prognosis of P, as also mentioned by the author. When the prognosis like OS is compared to other factors, unless D is proven to be an independent factor influencing the prognosis, its usefulness beyond the previous report cannot be evaluated. Consequently, it would be too much to say that we should perform dissection based on these results.
The impression is that the description of statistical analysis is far too brief.
There is no clear usefulness of publishing this document in this journal when compared to existing articles.
The author states that D is a member of C, but C is evaluated independently in the figure and the definition is unclear.
nakayama718 likes this translation
The impression is that the description of statistical analysis is far too brief.
There is no clear usefulness of publishing this document in this journal when compared to existing articles.
The author states that D is a member of C, but C is evaluated independently in the figure and the definition is unclear.
