Statistical Errors in Papers Published in the Journal of the Korean Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.
10.3857/jkstro.2008.26.4.289
- Author:
Hee Chul PARK
1
;
Doo Ho CHOI
;
Song Vogue AHN
;
Jin Oh KANG
;
Eun Seog KIM
;
Won PARK
;
Seung Do AHN
;
Dae Sik YANG
;
Hyong Geun YUN
;
Eun Ji CHUNG
;
Eui Kyu CHIE
;
Hongryull PYO
;
Semie HONG
Author Information
1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. dohochoi@skku.edu
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Statistics;
Radiation Oncology
- From:The Journal of the Korean Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology
2008;26(4):289-294
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To improve the quality of the statistical analysis of papers published in the Journal of the Korean Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (JKOSTRO) by evaluating commonly encountered errors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Papers published in the JKOSTRO from January 2006 to December 2007 were reviewed for methodological and statistical validity using a modified version of Ahn's checklist. A statistician reviewed individual papers and evaluated the list items in the checklist for each paper. To avoid the potential assessment error by the statistician who lacks expertise in the field of radiation oncology; the editorial board of the JKOSTRO reviewed each checklist for individual articles. A frequency analysis of the list items was performed using SAS (version 9.0, SAS Institute, NC, USA) software. RESULTS: A total of 73 papers including 5 case reports and 68 original articles were reviewed. Inferential statistics was used in 46 papers. The most commonly adopted statistical methodology was a survival analysis (58.7%). Only 19% of papers were free of statistical errors. Errors of omission were encountered in 34 (50.0%) papers. Errors of commission were encountered in 35 (51.5%) papers. Twenty-one papers (30.9%) had both errors of omission and commission. CONCLUSION: A variety of statistical errors were encountered in papers published in the JKOSTRO. The current study suggests that a more thorough review of the statistical analysis is needed for manuscripts submitted in the JKOSTRO.
