Use of Data Analysis Methods in Dental Publications: Is There Evidence of a Methodological Change?

Objectives: To evaluate how data analysis methods in dental studies have changed in recent years. Methods: A total of 400 articles published in 2010 and 2017 in five dental journals, Journal of Dental Research, Caries Research, Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology, Journal of Dentistry, and Act...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Pentti Nieminen, Hannu Vähänikkilä
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2020-02-01
Series:Publications
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/8/1/9
id doaj-e25a7145524a49178c3f54b9129c0b53
record_format Article
spelling doaj-e25a7145524a49178c3f54b9129c0b532020-11-25T01:47:08ZengMDPI AGPublications2304-67752020-02-0181910.3390/publications8010009publications8010009Use of Data Analysis Methods in Dental Publications: Is There Evidence of a Methodological Change?Pentti Nieminen0Hannu Vähänikkilä1Medical Informatics and Data Analysis Research Group, University of Oulu, 90014 Oulu, FinlandInfrastructure of Population Studies, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oulu, 90014 Oulu, FinlandObjectives: To evaluate how data analysis methods in dental studies have changed in recent years. Methods: A total of 400 articles published in 2010 and 2017 in five dental journals, Journal of Dental Research, Caries Research, Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology, Journal of Dentistry, and Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, were analyzed. The study characteristics and the reporting of data analysis techniques were systematically identified. Results: The statistical intensity of the dental journals did not change from 2010 to 2017. Dental researchers did not adopt the data mining, machine learning, or Bayesian approaches advocated in the computer-oriented methodological literature. The determination of statistical significance was the most generally used method for conducting research in both 2010 and 2017. Observational study designs were more common in 2017. Insufficient and incomplete descriptions of statistical methods were still a serious problem. Conclusion: The stabilization of statistical intensity in the literature suggests that papers applying highly computationally complex data analysis methods have not meaningfully contributed to dental research or clinical care. Greater rigor is required in reporting the methods in dental research articles, given the current pervasiveness of failure to describe the basic techniques used.https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/8/1/9methodologydata analysispublicationsdentistrystatistics
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Pentti Nieminen
Hannu Vähänikkilä
spellingShingle Pentti Nieminen
Hannu Vähänikkilä
Use of Data Analysis Methods in Dental Publications: Is There Evidence of a Methodological Change?
Publications
methodology
data analysis
publications
dentistry
statistics
author_facet Pentti Nieminen
Hannu Vähänikkilä
author_sort Pentti Nieminen
title Use of Data Analysis Methods in Dental Publications: Is There Evidence of a Methodological Change?
title_short Use of Data Analysis Methods in Dental Publications: Is There Evidence of a Methodological Change?
title_full Use of Data Analysis Methods in Dental Publications: Is There Evidence of a Methodological Change?
title_fullStr Use of Data Analysis Methods in Dental Publications: Is There Evidence of a Methodological Change?
title_full_unstemmed Use of Data Analysis Methods in Dental Publications: Is There Evidence of a Methodological Change?
title_sort use of data analysis methods in dental publications: is there evidence of a methodological change?
publisher MDPI AG
series Publications
issn 2304-6775
publishDate 2020-02-01
description Objectives: To evaluate how data analysis methods in dental studies have changed in recent years. Methods: A total of 400 articles published in 2010 and 2017 in five dental journals, Journal of Dental Research, Caries Research, Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology, Journal of Dentistry, and Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, were analyzed. The study characteristics and the reporting of data analysis techniques were systematically identified. Results: The statistical intensity of the dental journals did not change from 2010 to 2017. Dental researchers did not adopt the data mining, machine learning, or Bayesian approaches advocated in the computer-oriented methodological literature. The determination of statistical significance was the most generally used method for conducting research in both 2010 and 2017. Observational study designs were more common in 2017. Insufficient and incomplete descriptions of statistical methods were still a serious problem. Conclusion: The stabilization of statistical intensity in the literature suggests that papers applying highly computationally complex data analysis methods have not meaningfully contributed to dental research or clinical care. Greater rigor is required in reporting the methods in dental research articles, given the current pervasiveness of failure to describe the basic techniques used.
topic methodology
data analysis
publications
dentistry
statistics
url https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/8/1/9
work_keys_str_mv AT penttinieminen useofdataanalysismethodsindentalpublicationsisthereevidenceofamethodologicalchange
AT hannuvahanikkila useofdataanalysismethodsindentalpublicationsisthereevidenceofamethodologicalchange
_version_ 1725016031313788928