A review of the statistical analysis used in papers published in Clinical Radiology and British Journal of Radiology.
Statistical analysis such as significance testing have become essential features of published medical studies. This has resulted in an increased frequency with which statistics are used, making the interpretation of scientific publications more difficult. There is an extensive array of tests and techniques. The aim of this study is to identify which statistical tests are used in radiology publications. All major articles published in Clinical Radiology and British Journal of Radiology in one year were reviewed. The frequency of statistical methods used was as follows: no statistical method or descriptive statistics only 103 (47%), one type of statistical method 67 (31%), and two or more methods 47 (22%). Statistics dealing with basic inference, decisions, contingency tables or correlation/regression techniques were found in 124 (53%) in which a procedure had been used. Advanced statistics including receiver operating characteristics (ROC), odds ratio, regression techniques, multiway ANOVA, and nonparametric ANOVA studies accounted for only 41 (19%) in which a procedure had been used. We conclude that descriptive analysis and basic statistical techniques account for most of the statistical tests reported. Physicians should concentrate on improving their understanding of basic statistics but advice should be sought from professionals in the fields of biostatistics and epidemiology as to whether the use of more advanced techniques would be more appropriate.
Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles 90095-1721, USA.
J
J
Goldin
W
W
Zhu
J W
JW
Sayre
D006801:Humans; D010506:Periodicals as Topic; D011871:Radiology; D013223:Statistics as Topic