Quality of reporting statistics in two Indian pharmacology journals

被引:10
|
作者
Jaykaran [1 ]
Yadav, Preeti [1 ]
机构
[1] Govt Med Coll, Dept Pharmacol, Surat 395001, Gujarat, India
关键词
Inappropriate statistics; Indian Journals; Pharmacology;
D O I
10.4103/0976-500X.81897
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
Objective: To evaluate the reporting of the statistical methods in articles published in two Indian pharmacology journals. Materials and Methods: All original articles published since 2002 were downloaded from the journals' (Indian Journal of Pharmacology (IJP) and Indian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology (IJPP)) website. These articles were evaluated on the basis of appropriateness of descriptive statistics and inferential statistics. Descriptive statistics was evaluated on the basis of reporting of method of description and central tendencies. Inferential statistics was evaluated on the basis of fulfi lling of assumption of statistical methods and appropriateness of statistical tests. Values are described as frequencies, percentage, and 95% confi dence interval (CI) around the percentages. Results: Inappropriate descriptive statistics was observed in 150 (78.1%, 95% CI 71.7-83.3%) articles. Most common reason for this inappropriate descriptive statistics was use of mean +/- SEM at the place of "mean (SD)" or "mean +/- SD." Most common statistical method used was one-way ANOVA (58.4%). Information regarding checking of assumption of statistical test was mentioned in only two articles. Inappropriate statistical test was observed in 61 (31.7%, 95% CI 25.6-38.6%) articles. Most common reason for inappropriate statistical test was the use of two group test for three or more groups. Conclusion: Articles published in two Indian pharmacology journals are not devoid of statistical errors.
引用
收藏
页码:85 / 89
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Reporting quality of case reports in international dermatology journals
    Miguel, D.
    Gonzalez, N.
    Illing, T.
    Elsner, P.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY, 2018, 178 (01) : E3 - E4
  • [32] Reviewing the reviewers: the quality of reporting in three secondary journals
    Devereaux, PJ
    Manns, BJ
    Ghali, WA
    Quan, H
    Guyatt, GH
    [J]. CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 2001, 164 (11) : 1573 - 1576
  • [33] Quality improvement and quantity enhancement of Indian LIS journals
    Jeevan, V. K. J.
    [J]. ANNALS OF LIBRARY AND INFORMATION STUDIES, 2014, 61 (03) : 217 - 226
  • [34] STATISTICS IN JOURNALS
    DODWELL, D
    [J]. LANCET, 1991, 337 (8738): : 432 - 432
  • [35] Quality of Reporting in Randomized Trials Published in High-Quality Surgical Journals
    Sinha, Sidhartha
    Sinha, Shrestha
    Ashby, Elizabeth
    Jayaram, Raja
    Grocott, Michael P. W.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS, 2009, 209 (05) : 565 - 571
  • [36] Statistics: not a confidence trick. A commentary on "Guidelines for reporting statistics in journals published by the American Physiological Society: the sequel"
    Rangachari, P. K.
    [J]. ADVANCES IN PHYSIOLOGY EDUCATION, 2007, 31 (04) : 300 - 301
  • [37] A systematic survey of the quality of research reporting in general orthopaedic journals
    Parsons, N. R.
    Hiskens, R.
    Price, C. L.
    Achten, J.
    Costa, M. L.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME, 2011, 93B (09): : 1154 - 1159
  • [38] The reporting quality of prediction models in oncology journals: A systematic review
    Takemura, T.
    Kataoka, Y.
    Uneno, Y.
    Otoshi, T.
    Matsumoto, H.
    Tsutsumi, Y.
    Tsujimoto, Y.
    Yuasa, M.
    Yoshioka, T.
    Wada, H.
    [J]. ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, 2018, 29
  • [39] Quality of Reporting in Predictive Biomarker Studies in Anatomic Pathology Journals
    Caron, Justin
    Cohen, Michael B.
    Schmidt, Robert L.
    [J]. LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2016, 96 : 491A - 491A
  • [40] Quality of Reporting in Predictive Biomarker Studies in Anatomic Pathology Journals
    Caron, Justin
    Cohen, Michael B.
    Schmidt, Robert L.
    [J]. MODERN PATHOLOGY, 2016, 29 : 491A - 491A