PMCCPMCCPMCC

Search tips
Search criteria 

Advanced

 
Logo of bmcmrmBioMed Centralsearchsubmit a manuscriptregisterthis articleBMC Medical Research Methodology
 
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012; 12: 60.
Published online 2012 April 25. doi:  10.1186/1471-2288-12-60
PMCID: PMC3476984
An evaluation of the quality of statistical design and analysis of published medical research: results from a systematic survey of general orthopaedic journals
Nick R Parsons,corresponding author1 Charlotte L Price,2 Richard Hiskens,3 Juul Achten,1 and Matthew L Costa1
1Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV2 2DX, UK
2Public Health, Epidemiology and Biostatistics Group, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, Uk
3University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK
corresponding authorCorresponding author.
Nick R Parsons: nick.parsons/at/warwick.ac.uk; Charlotte L Price: c.l.price/at/bham.ac.uk; Richard Hiskens: rahiskens/at/doctors.org.uk; Juul Achten: j.achten/at/warwick.ac.uk; Matthew L Costa: matthew.costa/at/warwick.ac.uk
Received November 1, 2011; Accepted April 16, 2012.
Abstract
Background
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.
Methods
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.
Results
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.
Conclusion
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.
Articles from BMC Medical Research Methodology are provided here courtesy of
BioMed Central