Document Detail

Use of Statistical Analyses in the Ophthalmic Literature.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  24612977     Owner:  NLM     Status:  Publisher    
PURPOSE: To identify the most commonly used statistical analyses in the ophthalmic literature and to determine the likely gain in comprehension of the literature that readers could expect if they were to add knowledge of more advanced techniques sequentially to their statistical repertoire.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
METHODS: All articles published from January 2012 through December 2012 in Ophthalmology, the American Journal of Ophthalmology, and Archives of Ophthalmology were reviewed. A total of 780 peer-reviewed articles were included. Two reviewers examined each article and assigned categories to each one depending on the type of statistical analyses used. Discrepancies between reviewers were resolved by consensus.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Total number and percentage of articles containing each category of statistical analysis were obtained. Additionally, we estimated the accumulated number and percentage of articles that a reader would be expected to be able to interpret depending on their statistical repertoire.
RESULTS: Readers with little or no statistical knowledge would be expected to be able to interpret the statistical methods presented in only 20.8% of articles. To understand more than half (51.4%) of the articles published, readers would be expected to be familiar with at least 15 different statistical methods. Knowledge of 21 categories of statistical methods was necessary to comprehend 70.9% of articles, whereas knowledge of more than 29 categories was necessary to comprehend more than 90% of articles. Articles related to retina and glaucoma subspecialties showed a tendency for using more complex analysis when compared with articles from the cornea subspecialty.
CONCLUSIONS: Readers of clinical journals in ophthalmology need to have substantial knowledge of statistical methodology to understand the results of studies published in the literature. The frequency of the use of complex statistical analyses also indicates that those involved in the editorial peer-review process must have sound statistical knowledge to appraise critically the articles submitted for publication. The results of this study could provide guidance to direct the statistical learning of clinical ophthalmologists, researchers, and educators involved in the design of courses for residents and medical students.
Renato Lisboa; Daniel Meira-Freitas; Andrew J Tatham; Amir H Marvasti; Lucie Sharpsten; Felipe A Medeiros
Related Documents :
19804517 - Technical mistakes during the acquisition of the electrocardiogram.
23835037 - Eau guidelines on surgical treatment of urinary incontinence.
24403397 - Biased predecisional processing of leading and nonleading alternatives.
24621967 - Relating demographic characteristics of a small mammal to remotely sensed forest-stand ...
3706537 - A mathematical model of the rat proximal tubule.
20333537 - Connecting biology and mechanics in fracture healing: an integrated mathematical modeli...
Publication Detail:
Type:  JOURNAL ARTICLE     Date:  2014-3-5
Journal Detail:
Title:  Ophthalmology     Volume:  -     ISSN:  1549-4713     ISO Abbreviation:  Ophthalmology     Publication Date:  2014 Mar 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2014-3-11     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  7802443     Medline TA:  Ophthalmology     Country:  -    
Other Details:
Languages:  ENG     Pagination:  -     Citation Subset:  -    
Copyright Information:
Copyright © 2014 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Diagnostic Distinctions and Genetic Analysis of Patients Diagnosed with Moebius Syndrome.
Next Document:  Quantitative Assessment of Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Defect Depth Using Spectral-Domain Optical Cohe...