对已发表医学研究的统计设计和分析质量的评估：对普通骨科期刊进行系统调查的结果。
An evaluation of the quality of statistical design and analysis of published medical research: results from a systematic survey of general orthopaedic journals.
机构信息
Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV2 2DX, UK.
出版信息
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Apr 25;12:60. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-60.
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.
背景
统计学在创伤和骨科领域的研究报告中的应用变得越来越重要和复杂。尽管广泛应用了统计分析，但它仍然是一个经常在概念上理解不够透彻的学科，导致许多论文存在明显的方法学缺陷和不充分的报告。
方法
详细的统计调查采用了经过验证的问卷，对 100 篇具有代表性的骨科论文进行了抽样调查，评估了试验设计和统计分析方法的质量。
结果
调查发现研究设计、统计方法和结果呈现方面存在缺陷。总体而言，在所调查的研究中，有 17%（95%置信区间；10-26%）的研究结论没有被结果明确证明，39%（30-49%）的研究应该进行不同的分析，17%（10-26%）的研究可以改变总体结论。
结论
只有通过统计学家、临床医生、评论员和期刊编辑之间更好的对话，才能解决本调查中突出的设计方法学和分析方面的缺陷。
Zotero 插件