Issues of the statistical analysis in the Russian ophthalmic journals

Purpose. To rate the quality of the statistical analysis in the leading Russian journals in ophthalmology.Material and methods. The study was performed of the quality of the statistical analysis and the formation of research groups in 90 original articles published in 2015 in leading Russian ophthal...

詳細記述

書誌詳細
出版年:Офтальмохирургия
第一著者: A. A. Shpak
フォーマット: 論文
言語:ロシア語
出版事項: Publishing house "Ophthalmology" 2016-05-01
主題:
オンライン・アクセス:https://www.ophthalmosurgery.ru/jour/article/view/235
_version_ 1852717916487680000
author A. A. Shpak
author_facet A. A. Shpak
author_sort A. A. Shpak
collection DOAJ
container_title Офтальмохирургия
description Purpose. To rate the quality of the statistical analysis in the leading Russian journals in ophthalmology.Material and methods. The study was performed of the quality of the statistical analysis and the formation of research groups in 90 original articles published in 2015 in leading Russian ophthalmology journals. Twenty-three articles (case reports, surgical techniques, etc.) did not contain statistical data and were excluded. As a result, 67 articles were studied.Results. Appropriate statistical analysis without serious mistakes was found in 14 publications (21%) but only five of them (7%) did not contain any shortcomings. The most common errors were: inclusion in the analysis of both eyes of patients without correction for the correlation of the parameters of the fellow eyes (30%), comparing of multiple groups by incorrect methods (28%; 82% of the articles requiring this comparison), comparing proportions without the use of proper methods (24%), absence (25%) or a clear deficiency (18%) of the statistical analysis section, lack of information on the format of the data used M±SD or M±m (16%), lack of guidance on the use or incorrect use of unpaired or paired Student’s t test (15%). Concerning the formation of research groups the most common errors were: sample size calculation was not present (all articles), sampling order was not defined (82%), exclusion criteria were absent (64%).Conclusion. The analysis of original articles in leading Russian ophthalmology journals in 2015 indicates the need for a significant increase in quality requirements for statistical data processing and the formation of research groups. Based on this analysis, it was proposed to amend the rules for authors in ophthalmology journals.
format Article
id doaj-art-4c21cdc4e00a49bb8f3285e5d930c973
institution Directory of Open Access Journals
issn 0235-4160
2312-4970
language Russian
publishDate 2016-05-01
publisher Publishing house "Ophthalmology"
record_format Article
spelling doaj-art-4c21cdc4e00a49bb8f3285e5d930c9732025-08-19T21:13:44ZrusPublishing house "Ophthalmology"Офтальмохирургия0235-41602312-49702016-05-0101737710.25276/0235-4160-2016-1-73-77224Issues of the statistical analysis in the Russian ophthalmic journalsA. A. Shpak0The S. Fyodorov Eye Microsurgery Federal State InstitutionPurpose. To rate the quality of the statistical analysis in the leading Russian journals in ophthalmology.Material and methods. The study was performed of the quality of the statistical analysis and the formation of research groups in 90 original articles published in 2015 in leading Russian ophthalmology journals. Twenty-three articles (case reports, surgical techniques, etc.) did not contain statistical data and were excluded. As a result, 67 articles were studied.Results. Appropriate statistical analysis without serious mistakes was found in 14 publications (21%) but only five of them (7%) did not contain any shortcomings. The most common errors were: inclusion in the analysis of both eyes of patients without correction for the correlation of the parameters of the fellow eyes (30%), comparing of multiple groups by incorrect methods (28%; 82% of the articles requiring this comparison), comparing proportions without the use of proper methods (24%), absence (25%) or a clear deficiency (18%) of the statistical analysis section, lack of information on the format of the data used M±SD or M±m (16%), lack of guidance on the use or incorrect use of unpaired or paired Student’s t test (15%). Concerning the formation of research groups the most common errors were: sample size calculation was not present (all articles), sampling order was not defined (82%), exclusion criteria were absent (64%).Conclusion. The analysis of original articles in leading Russian ophthalmology journals in 2015 indicates the need for a significant increase in quality requirements for statistical data processing and the formation of research groups. Based on this analysis, it was proposed to amend the rules for authors in ophthalmology journals.https://www.ophthalmosurgery.ru/jour/article/view/235statistical analysisthe formation of research groupsmultiple groupspaired eyes
spellingShingle A. A. Shpak
Issues of the statistical analysis in the Russian ophthalmic journals
statistical analysis
the formation of research groups
multiple groups
paired eyes
title Issues of the statistical analysis in the Russian ophthalmic journals
title_full Issues of the statistical analysis in the Russian ophthalmic journals
title_fullStr Issues of the statistical analysis in the Russian ophthalmic journals
title_full_unstemmed Issues of the statistical analysis in the Russian ophthalmic journals
title_short Issues of the statistical analysis in the Russian ophthalmic journals
title_sort issues of the statistical analysis in the russian ophthalmic journals
topic statistical analysis
the formation of research groups
multiple groups
paired eyes
url https://www.ophthalmosurgery.ru/jour/article/view/235
work_keys_str_mv AT aashpak issuesofthestatisticalanalysisintherussianophthalmicjournals