Suppr超能文献

《柳叶刀》的统计审核流程:作者可改进之处。

The Lancet's statistical review process: areas for improvement by authors.

作者信息

Gore S M, Jones G, Thompson S G

机构信息

MRC Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge, UK.

出版信息

Lancet. 1992 Jul 11;340(8811):100-2. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(92)90409-v.

Abstract

The Lancet now incorporates statistical review of submitted papers which remain candidates for publication after conventional review. We summarise here criticisms noted by the statistical reviewers for 191 such papers received between November, 1990, and June, 1991. Only 54% of papers were deemed acceptable or acceptable after revision; the others were either recommended for rejection (14%) or for more substantial revision and re-review (32%). Descriptions of methods and of results were found inadequate in about half of the papers; about one-quarter of papers had inadequate abstracts and conclusions. Major errors of inference were made in 48 papers and went hand in hand with major criticisms of analysis or design in those papers. The natural focus of statistical review is whether conclusions drawn are justified by study design and statistical analysis. In this, there is room for improvement by authors.

摘要

《柳叶刀》现在纳入了对提交论文的统计学审查,这些论文在经过常规审查后仍有可能发表。在此,我们总结了1990年11月至1991年6月期间收到的191篇此类论文的统计学审查意见。只有54%的论文被认为可以接受或修订后可以接受;其他论文要么被建议拒收(14%),要么被建议进行更实质性的修订并重新审查(32%)。约一半的论文在方法和结果描述方面存在不足;约四分之一的论文摘要和结论不充分。48篇论文存在重大推理错误,同时这些论文在分析或设计方面也受到了重大批评。统计学审查的自然重点是研究设计和统计分析是否能证明得出的结论合理。在这方面,作者还有改进的空间。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验