Literature DB >> 16500253

Statistical methods in the surgical literature.

Jibby E Kurichi1, Seema S Sonnad.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is important that clinicians understand statistical methods to incorporate statistics into their own research and to correctly translate published literature into improved patient care. The purpose of this study was to identify frequency and appropriate use of statistical methods in clinical surgical publications during the past 18 years. STUDY
DESIGN: The study included randomly selected issues from odd-numbered years of Annals of Surgery (Annals) and Archives of Surgery (Archives) between 1985 and 2003, and issues in 2003 from Journal of the American College of Surgeons (JACS), Journal of Surgical Research (JSR), and Surgery. We identified all statistical procedures reported in each article, examined correctness of methods, and reported trends in publication of statistical methods over time.
RESULTS: The proportion of publications incorporating statistics has increased over time. Declining trends were seen in the proportion of articles with no statistics (p < 0.0001). Approximately 35% of articles in 1985 did not use statistics compared with < 10% in 2003. Nonparametric tests increased (p < 0.0001) during the study period. In Archives of Surgery, nonparametric tests increased from 0% in 1985 to 33% in 2003, and in Annals of Surgery, from 12% in 1985 to 49% in 2003. Twenty-seven percent of studies included incorrect selection or reporting of statistical methods.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the statistical complexity of research in clinical surgery journals is increasing. It is important that clinicians reading this literature have sufficient knowledge of statistical methods to facilitate interpretation of increasingly sophisticated statistical analyses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16500253     DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2005.11.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Surg        ISSN: 1072-7515            Impact factor:   6.113


  13 in total

1.  Analysis of variance: is there a difference in means and what does it mean?

Authors:  Lillian S Kao; Charles E Green
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2007-10-22       Impact factor: 2.192

2.  Biostatistical resources in an academic medical center.

Authors:  Matthew S Thiese; Andria Thatcher; Melissa Cheng
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Misuse of statistics in surgical literature.

Authors:  Matthew S Thiese; Brenden Ronna; Riann B Robbins
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  Truths, lies, and statistics.

Authors:  Matthew S Thiese; Skyler Walker; Jenna Lindsey
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 5.  Usefulness of statistics for establishing evidence-based reproductive medicine.

Authors:  Yasunori Sato; Masahiko Gosho; Kiyotaka Toshimori
Journal:  Reprod Med Biol       Date:  2011-08-05

Review 6.  Review of the Statistical Methods Used in Original Articles Published in Iranian Journal of Public Health from 2015-2019: A Review Article.

Authors:  Sajjad Bahariniya; Farzan Madadizadeh
Journal:  Iran J Public Health       Date:  2021-08       Impact factor: 1.429

7.  Quality of reporting statistics in two Indian pharmacology journals.

Authors:  Preeti Yadav
Journal:  J Pharmacol Pharmacother       Date:  2011-04

Review 8.  Misuse of statistical methods in 10 leading Chinese medical journals in 1998 and 2008.

Authors:  Shunquan Wu; Zhichao Jin; Xin Wei; Qingbin Gao; Jian Lu; Xiuqiang Ma; Cheng Wu; Qian He; Meijing Wu; Rui Wang; Jinfang Xu; Jia He
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2011-11-02

9.  A bibliometric analysis of statistical terms used in American Physical Therapy Association journals (2011-2012): evidence for educating physical therapists.

Authors:  Julie K Tilson; Katie Marshall; Jodi J Tam; Linda Fetters
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2016-04-22       Impact factor: 2.463

10.  Matched case-control studies: a review of reported statistical methodology.

Authors:  Daniel J Niven; Luc R Berthiaume; Gordon H Fick; Kevin B Laupland
Journal:  Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2012-04-27       Impact factor: 4.790

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.