Welch G E, Gabbe S G
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, USA.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Nov;175(5):1138-41. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(96)70018-2.
Our purpose was an assessment of statistical analysis in studies published in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, as well as documentation of appropriate and inappropriate statistical application.
All papers included in the Clinical Articles section and transactions of societies sections of the January through June 1994 issues of the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (volume 170, numbers 1 to 6) were reviewed for statistical usage. Each paper was given a rating for the thoroughness of the listing of applied statistics and a rating for the appropriateness of statistical usage, when possible.
Of the 190 available articles, 53 consisted of studies void of statistics, 8 of which required statistics or claimed significance without the use of statistics. Therefore 145 articles were included in the final analysis. Because of inappropriate or incomplete descriptions of statistics used within the article (52.6%), the ability to assess the appropriateness of usage was severely limited. However, 44 articles (30.3%) could be classified as having appropriate usage of statistics, whereas 46 articles (31.7%) were deemed to have inappropriate usage of statistics. Furthermore, 27 of these 46 articles were noted to have serious flaws.
The lack of complete and detailed listings of applied statistics made it difficult to assess the appropriateness of more than half the studies examined, suggesting a need for more detailed guidelines as to the listing of statistical procedures used. Despite this fact, nearly one third of the articles contained examples of statistics used inappropriately. These findings suggest that a policy of statistical review be instituted.
我们旨在评估发表于《美国妇产科学杂志》上的研究中的统计分析情况，并记录统计方法的恰当与不恰当应用。
对1994年1月至6月期《美国妇产科学杂志》（第170卷，第1至6期）临床文章板块及学会汇刊板块中的所有论文进行统计方法使用情况的审查。每篇论文在可能的情况下，会根据所应用统计方法列举的详尽程度以及统计方法使用的恰当性给出评分。
在190篇可得文章中，53篇研究未使用统计方法，其中8篇需要使用统计方法或在未使用统计方法的情况下声称具有显著性。因此，最终分析纳入了145篇文章。由于文章中对所使用统计方法的描述不恰当或不完整（52.6%），评估使用恰当性的能力受到严重限制。然而，44篇文章（30.3%）可归类为统计方法使用恰当，而46篇文章（31.7%）被认为统计方法使用不恰当。此外，这46篇文章中有27篇存在严重缺陷。
应用统计方法缺乏完整且详细的列举，使得难以评估超过半数所审查研究的恰当性，这表明需要针对所使用统计程序的列举制定更详细的指南。尽管如此，近三分之一的文章包含统计方法使用不当的例子。这些发现表明应制定统计审查政策。
