Literature DB >> 11904628

Statistics usage in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology: has anything changed?

Gerald E Welch1, Steven G Gabbe.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to compare statistical listing and usage between articles published in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology in 1994 with those published in 1999. STUDY
DESIGN: All papers included in the obstetrics, fetus-placenta-newborn, and gynecology sections and the transactions of societies sections of the January through June 1999 issues of the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (volume 180, numbers 1 to 6) were reviewed for statistical usage. Each paper was given a rating for the cataloging of applied statistics and a rating for the appropriateness of statistical usage, when possible. These results were compared with the data collected on a similar review of articles published in 1994.
RESULTS: Of the 238 available articles, 195 contained statistics and were reviewed. In comparison to the articles published in 1994, there were significantly more articles that completely cataloged applied statistics (74.3% vs 47.4%) (P <.0001), and there was a significant improvement in appropriateness of statistical usage (56.4% vs 30.3%) (P <.0001).
CONCLUSION: Changes in the Instructions to Authors regarding the description of applied statistics and probable changes in the behavior of researchers and Editors have led to an improvement in the quality of statistics in papers published in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11904628     DOI: 10.1067/mob.2002.122144

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  8 in total

1.  The value of a P value.

Authors:  H J Cloft
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Reporting of data analysis methods in psychiatric journals: Trends from 1996 to 2018.

Authors:  Pentti Nieminen; Jasleen Kaur
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2019-05-27       Impact factor: 4.035

3.  Methodology and analytic techniques used in clinical research: associations with journal impact factor.

Authors:  Lindsay M Kuroki; Jenifer E Allsworth; Jeffrey F Peipert
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 7.661

Review 4.  The misuse and abuse of statistics in biomedical research.

Authors:  Matthew S Thiese; Zachary C Arnold; Skyler D Walker
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.313

5.  Statistical trends in the Journal of the American Medical Association and implications for training across the continuum of medical education.

Authors:  Lauren D Arnold; Melissa Braganza; Rondek Salih; Graham A Colditz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-10-30       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Assessment of Statistical Methodologies and Pitfalls of Dissertations Carried Out at National Cancer Institute, Cairo University

Authors:  Rasha M Allam; Maissa K Noaman; Manar M Moneer; Inas A Elattar
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2017-01-01

7.  Statistical Use in Clinical Studies: Is There Evidence of a Methodological Shift?

Authors:  Dali Yi; Dihui Ma; Gaoming Li; Liang Zhou; Qin Xiao; Yanqi Zhang; Xiaoyu Liu; Hongru Chen; Julia Christine Pettigrew; Dong Yi; Ling Liu; Yazhou Wu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-08       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Prevalence and Prevention of Reproducibility Deficiencies in Life Sciences Research: Large-Scale Meta-Analyses.

Authors:  Nadine M Mansour; E Andrew Balas; Frances M Yang; Marlo M Vernon
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2020-09-22
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.