Educational Psychology, Research, and Foundations Program, University of South Carolina, Columbia SC 29208, USA.
Am J Public Health. 2012 Jul;102(7):1399-405. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300398. Epub 2012 Jan 19.
We assessed how frequently researchers reported the use of statistical techniques that take into account the complex sampling structure of survey data and sample weights in published peer-reviewed articles using data from 3 commonly used adolescent health surveys.
We performed a systematic review of 1003 published empirical research articles from 1995 to 2010 that used data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (n=765), Monitoring the Future (n=146), or Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (n=92) indexed in ERIC, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science.
Across the data sources, 60% of articles reported accounting for design effects and 61% reported using sample weights. However, the frequency and clarity of reporting varied across databases, publication year, author affiliation with the data, and journal.
Given the statistical bias that occurs when design effects of complex data are not incorporated or sample weights are omitted, this study calls for improvement in the dissemination of research findings based on complex sample data. Authors, editors, and reviewers need to work together to improve the transparency of published findings using complex sample data.
我们使用来自三个常用青少年健康调查的数据,评估研究人员在已发表的同行评审文章中报告使用考虑调查数据复杂抽样结构和样本权重的统计技术的频率。
我们对 1995 年至 2010 年期间使用国家青少年健康纵向研究(n=765)、监测未来(n=146)或青年风险行为监测系统(n=92)数据的 1003 篇已发表实证研究文章进行了系统回顾,这些文章均被 ERIC、PsycINFO、PubMed 和 Web of Science 索引。
在所有数据源中,60%的文章报告了对设计效果的考虑,61%的文章报告了使用样本权重。然而,报告的频率和清晰度因数据库、出版年份、作者与数据的隶属关系以及期刊而异。
鉴于复杂数据的设计效果未被纳入或样本权重被忽略时会出现统计偏差,本研究呼吁改善基于复杂样本数据的研究结果的传播。作者、编辑和审稿人需要共同努力,提高使用复杂样本数据发表的研究结果的透明度。