An evaluation of the quality of statistical design and analysis of published medical research: results from a systematic survey of general orthopaedic journals

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The application of statistics in reported research in trauma and orthopaedic surgery has become ever more important and complex. Despite the extensive use of statistical analysis, it is still a subject which is often not conceptually...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Parsons Nick R, Price Charlotte L, Hiskens Richard, Achten Juul, Costa Matthew L
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2012-04-01
Series:BMC Medical Research Methodology
Online Access:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/12/60
id doaj-7ab980d04aac42b9a30eb7d76ef85a27
record_format Article
spelling doaj-7ab980d04aac42b9a30eb7d76ef85a272020-11-24T23:07:51ZengBMCBMC Medical Research Methodology1471-22882012-04-011216010.1186/1471-2288-12-60An evaluation of the quality of statistical design and analysis of published medical research: results from a systematic survey of general orthopaedic journalsParsons Nick RPrice Charlotte LHiskens RichardAchten JuulCosta Matthew L<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The application of statistics in reported research in trauma and orthopaedic surgery has become ever more important and complex. Despite the extensive use of statistical analysis, it is still a subject which is often not conceptually well understood, resulting in clear methodological flaws and inadequate reporting in many papers.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A detailed statistical survey sampled 100 representative orthopaedic papers using a validated questionnaire that assessed the quality of the trial design and statistical analysis methods.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The survey found evidence of failings in study design, statistical methodology and presentation of the results. Overall, in 17% (95% confidence interval; 10–26%) of the studies investigated the conclusions were not clearly justified by the results, in 39% (30–49%) of studies a different analysis should have been undertaken and in 17% (10–26%) a different analysis could have made a difference to the overall conclusions.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>It is only by an improved dialogue between statistician, clinician, reviewer and journal editor that the failings in design methodology and analysis highlighted by this survey can be addressed.</p> http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/12/60
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Parsons Nick R
Price Charlotte L
Hiskens Richard
Achten Juul
Costa Matthew L
spellingShingle Parsons Nick R
Price Charlotte L
Hiskens Richard
Achten Juul
Costa Matthew L
An evaluation of the quality of statistical design and analysis of published medical research: results from a systematic survey of general orthopaedic journals
BMC Medical Research Methodology
author_facet Parsons Nick R
Price Charlotte L
Hiskens Richard
Achten Juul
Costa Matthew L
author_sort Parsons Nick R
title An evaluation of the quality of statistical design and analysis of published medical research: results from a systematic survey of general orthopaedic journals
title_short An evaluation of the quality of statistical design and analysis of published medical research: results from a systematic survey of general orthopaedic journals
title_full An evaluation of the quality of statistical design and analysis of published medical research: results from a systematic survey of general orthopaedic journals
title_fullStr An evaluation of the quality of statistical design and analysis of published medical research: results from a systematic survey of general orthopaedic journals
title_full_unstemmed An evaluation of the quality of statistical design and analysis of published medical research: results from a systematic survey of general orthopaedic journals
title_sort evaluation of the quality of statistical design and analysis of published medical research: results from a systematic survey of general orthopaedic journals
publisher BMC
series BMC Medical Research Methodology
issn 1471-2288
publishDate 2012-04-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The application of statistics in reported research in trauma and orthopaedic surgery has become ever more important and complex. Despite the extensive use of statistical analysis, it is still a subject which is often not conceptually well understood, resulting in clear methodological flaws and inadequate reporting in many papers.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A detailed statistical survey sampled 100 representative orthopaedic papers using a validated questionnaire that assessed the quality of the trial design and statistical analysis methods.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The survey found evidence of failings in study design, statistical methodology and presentation of the results. Overall, in 17% (95% confidence interval; 10–26%) of the studies investigated the conclusions were not clearly justified by the results, in 39% (30–49%) of studies a different analysis should have been undertaken and in 17% (10–26%) a different analysis could have made a difference to the overall conclusions.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>It is only by an improved dialogue between statistician, clinician, reviewer and journal editor that the failings in design methodology and analysis highlighted by this survey can be addressed.</p>
url http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/12/60
work_keys_str_mv AT parsonsnickr anevaluationofthequalityofstatisticaldesignandanalysisofpublishedmedicalresearchresultsfromasystematicsurveyofgeneralorthopaedicjournals
AT pricecharlottel anevaluationofthequalityofstatisticaldesignandanalysisofpublishedmedicalresearchresultsfromasystematicsurveyofgeneralorthopaedicjournals
AT hiskensrichard anevaluationofthequalityofstatisticaldesignandanalysisofpublishedmedicalresearchresultsfromasystematicsurveyofgeneralorthopaedicjournals
AT achtenjuul anevaluationofthequalityofstatisticaldesignandanalysisofpublishedmedicalresearchresultsfromasystematicsurveyofgeneralorthopaedicjournals
AT costamatthewl anevaluationofthequalityofstatisticaldesignandanalysisofpublishedmedicalresearchresultsfromasystematicsurveyofgeneralorthopaedicjournals
AT parsonsnickr evaluationofthequalityofstatisticaldesignandanalysisofpublishedmedicalresearchresultsfromasystematicsurveyofgeneralorthopaedicjournals
AT pricecharlottel evaluationofthequalityofstatisticaldesignandanalysisofpublishedmedicalresearchresultsfromasystematicsurveyofgeneralorthopaedicjournals
AT hiskensrichard evaluationofthequalityofstatisticaldesignandanalysisofpublishedmedicalresearchresultsfromasystematicsurveyofgeneralorthopaedicjournals
AT achtenjuul evaluationofthequalityofstatisticaldesignandanalysisofpublishedmedicalresearchresultsfromasystematicsurveyofgeneralorthopaedicjournals
AT costamatthewl evaluationofthequalityofstatisticaldesignandanalysisofpublishedmedicalresearchresultsfromasystematicsurveyofgeneralorthopaedicjournals
_version_ 1725616709479432192