Cooper R J, Schriger D L, Tashman D A
University of California-Los Angeles Emergency Medicine Center, University of California-Los Angeles School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Ann Emerg Med. 2001 Jan;37(1):13-9. doi: 10.1067/mem.2001.111569.
To describe the type, quantity, and quality of graphics used to present original research in Annals of Emergency Medicine.
We performed a blinded, retrospective review of all graphics published in Annals of Emergency Medicine's original research articles from January 1998 through June 1999. We assessed the types of graphics, the use of special features to display detail, the clarity of each graphic, discrepancies within the graphic or between the graphic and text, and the efficiency of data presentation.
Forty-six percent (68/147) of original research communications contained at least 1 graphic. Of the 128 graphics in these 68 articles, simple univariate displays predominated (53%). Only one third of graphics displayed by-subject data through the use of one-way plots, scatter plots, or other formats. Graphics generally defined all symbols and abbreviations (99%) and were self-explanatory (88%). Techniques for conveying the richness of a data set were seldom used (11% of all graphics). Forty percent (51/128) of the graphics contained internal contradictions (15%), muddled displays (19%), numeric distortion (5%), nonstandard graphing conventions (7%), and other lapses in design or execution. Inefficiencies of data presentation included internal redundancy (16%), extraneous decoration (10%), and redundancy of graphic data with other text/tables (15%).
The majority of graphics in Annals of Emergency Medicine, although internally valid, failed to take full advantage of the graphic's potential and often depicted summary data when portrayal of subject-specific data was possible. To help readers fully understand research findings, authors and editors should take care to ensure that graphics efficiently and effectively portray the optimal amount of information.
描述用于呈现《急诊医学年鉴》中原创研究的图表类型、数量和质量。
我们对1998年1月至1999年6月发表在《急诊医学年鉴》原创研究文章中的所有图表进行了盲法回顾性审查。我们评估了图表的类型、用于显示细节的特殊特征的使用情况、每个图表的清晰度、图表内部或图表与文本之间的差异以及数据呈现的效率。
46%(68/147)的原创研究通讯至少包含1张图表。在这68篇文章中的128张图表中,简单的单变量展示占主导(53%)。只有三分之一的图表通过使用单向图、散点图或其他格式展示按主题的数据。图表通常定义了所有符号和缩写(99%)且具有自解释性(88%)。很少使用传达数据集丰富性的技术(占所有图表的11%)。40%(51/128)的图表存在内部矛盾(15%)、显示混乱(19%)、数字失真(5%)、非标准绘图惯例(7%)以及其他设计或执行失误。数据呈现的低效包括内部冗余(16%)、无关装饰(10%)以及图表数据与其他文本/表格的冗余(15%)。
《急诊医学年鉴》中的大多数图表虽然内部有效,但未能充分利用图表的潜力,并且在可能描绘特定主题数据时常常描绘汇总数据。为帮助读者充分理解研究结果,作者和编辑应注意确保图表高效且有效地描绘最佳信息量。