An Evaluation of the Use of Statistical Methods in the Journal of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases.
10.4046/trd.2004.57.2.168
- Author:
Won Jung KOH
1
;
Seung Joon LEE
;
Min Jong KANG
;
Hun Jae LEE
Author Information
1. Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Statistics;
Periodicals;
Medical Journalism;
Pulmonary Disease;
Korea
- MeSH:
Checklist;
Journalism, Medical;
Korea;
Lung Diseases;
Tuberculosis*
- From:Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
2004;57(2):168-179
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: The statistical analysis is an essential procedure ensuring that the results of researches are based on evidences rather than opinion. The purpose of this study is to evaluate which statistical techniques are used and whether these statistical methods are used appropriately or not in the journal of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed 185 articles reported in the journal of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases in 1999. We evaluated the validity of used statistical methods based upon the checklist that was developed on the basis of the guideline for statistical reporting in articles for medical journals by International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. RESULTS: Among 185 articles, original articles and case reports were 110 (59.5%) and 61 (33.0%) respectively. In 112 articles excluding case reports and reviews, statistical techniques were used in 107 articles (95.5%). In 94 articles (83.9%) descriptive and inferential methods were used, while in 13 (11.6%) articles only descriptive methods were used. With the types of inferential statistical techniques, comparison of means was most commonly used (64/94, 68.1%), followed by contingency table (43/94, 45.7%) and correlation or regression (18/94, 19.1%). Among the articles in which descriptive methods were used, 83.2% (89/107) showed inappropriate central tendency and dispersion. In the articles in which inferential methods were used, improper methods were applied in 88.8% (79/89) and the most frequent misuse of statistical methods was inappropriate use of parametric methods (35/89, 39.3%). Only 14 articles (13.1%) were satisfactory in utilization of statistical methodology. CONCLUSION: Most of the statistical errors found in the journal were misuses of statistical methods related to basic statistics. This study suggests that researchers should be more careful when they describe and apply statistical methods and more extensive statistical refereeing system would be needed.
