Dataset Information

Quantitative investigation of inappropriate regression model construction and the importance of medical statistics experts in observational medical research: a cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To investigate under what circumstances inappropriate use of 'multivariate analysis' is likely to occur and to identify the population that needs more support with medical statistics.

Study design and settings

The frequency of inappropriate regression model construction in multivariate analysis and related factors were investigated in observational medical research publications.

Results

The inappropriate algorithm of using only variables that were significant in univariate analysis was estimated to occur at 6.4% (95% CI 4.8% to 8.5%). This was observed in 1.1% of the publications with a medical statistics expert (hereinafter 'expert') as the first author, 3.5% if an expert was included as coauthor and in 12.2% if experts were not involved. In the publications where the number of cases was 50 or less and the study did not include experts, inappropriate algorithm usage was observed with a high proportion of 20.2%. The OR of the involvement of experts for this outcome was 0.28 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.53). A further, nation-level, analysis showed that the involvement of experts and the implementation of unfavourable multivariate analysis are associated at the nation-level analysis (R=-0.652).

Conclusion

Based on the results of this study, the benefit of participation of medical statistics experts is obvious. Experts should be involved for proper confounding adjustment and interpretation of statistical models.

SUBMITTER: Nojima M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5942431 | biostudies-literature | 2018 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Quantitative investigation of inappropriate regression model construction and the importance of medical statistics experts in observational medical research: a cross-sectional study.

Nojima Masanori M Tokunaga Mutsumi M Nagamura Fumitaka F

BMJ open 20180505 5

<h4>Objective</h4>To investigate under what circumstances inappropriate use of 'multivariate analysis' is likely to occur and to identify the population that needs more support with medical statistics.<h4>Study design and settings</h4>The frequency of inappropriate regression model construction in multivariate analysis and related factors were investigated in observational medical research publications.<h4>Results</h4>The inappropriate algorithm of using only variables that were significant in u ...[more]

PMID: 29730629

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Women remain underrepresented on faculties of medicine and the life sciences more broadly. Whether gender differences in self presentation of clinical research exist and may contribute to this gender gap has been challenging to explore empirically. The objective of this study was to analyze whether men and women differ in how positively they frame their research findings and to analyze whether the positive framing of research is associated with higher downstream citations. DESIGN:Retrospective observational study. DATA SOURCES:Titles and abstracts from 101?720 clinical research articles and approximately 6.2 million general life science articles indexed in PubMed and published between 2002 and 2017. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Analysis of article titles and abstracts to determine whether men and women differ in how positively they present their research through use of terms such as "novel" or "excellent." For a set of 25 positive terms, we estimated the relative probability of positive framing as a function of the gender composition of the first and last authors, adjusting for scientific journal, year of publication, journal impact, and scientific field. RESULTS:Articles in which both the first and last author were women used at least one of the 25 positive terms in 10.9% of titles or abstracts versus 12.2% for articles involving a male first or last author, corresponding to a 12.3% relative difference (95% CI 5.7% to 18.9%). Gender differences in positive presentation were greatest in high impact clinical journals (impact factor >10), in which women were 21.4% less likely to present research positively. Across all clinical journals, positive presentation was associated with 9.4% (6.6% to 12.2%) higher subsequent citations, and in high impact clinical journals 13.0% (9.5% to 16.5%) higher citations. Results were similar when broadened to general life science articles published in journals indexed by PubMed, suggesting that gender differences in positive word use generalize to broader samples. CONCLUSIONS:Clinical articles involving a male first or last author were more likely to present research findings positively in titles and abstracts compared with articles in which both the first and last author were women, particularly in the highest impact journals. Positive presentation of research findings was associated with higher downstream citations.

Project description:IntroductionExtracurricular research programmes (ERPs) may contribute to reducing the current shortage in physician-scientists, but usually select students based on grades only. The question arises if students should be selected based on their motivation, regardless of their previous academic performance. Focusing on grades and lacking to take motivation into account when selecting students for ERPs might exclude an important target group when aiming to cultivate future physician-scientists. Therefore, this study compared ERP students with lower and higher previous academic performance on subsequent academic performance, ERP performance, and motivational factors.MethodsProspective cohort study with undergraduate medical students who filled in a yearly questionnaire on motivational factors. Two student groups participating in an ERP were compared: students with first-year grade point average (GPA) ≥7 versus <7 on a 10-point grading scale. Linear and logistic regressions analyses were used to compare groups on subsequent academic performance (i.e. third-year GPA, in-time bachelor completion), ERP performance (i.e. drop-out, number of credits), and motivational factors (i.e. intrinsic motivation for research, research self-efficacy beliefs, perceptions of research, curiosity), while adjusting for gender and motivational factors at baseline.ResultsThe <7 group had significantly lower third-year GPA, and significantly higher odds for ERP drop-out than the ≥7 group. However, there was no significant between-group difference on in-time bachelor completion and the <7 group was not inferior to the ≥7 group in terms of intrinsic motivation for research, perceptions of research, and curiosity.ConclusionsSince intrinsic motivation for research, perceptions of research, and curiosity are prerequisites of future research involvement, it seems beneficial to focus on motivation when selecting students for ERPS, allowing students with lower current academic performance to participate in ERPs as well.

Project description:BackgroundThe scientific community increasingly is recognizing the need to bolster standards of data analysis given the widespread concern that basic mistakes in data analysis are contributing to the irreproducibility of many published research findings. The aim of this study was to investigate students' attitudes towards statistics within a multi-site medical educational context, monitor their changes and impact on student achievement. In addition, we performed a systematic review to better support our future pedagogical decisions in teaching applied statistics to medical students.MethodsA validated Serbian Survey of Attitudes Towards Statistics (SATS-36) questionnaire was administered to medical students attending obligatory introductory courses in biostatistics from three medical universities in the Western Balkans. A systematic review of peer-reviewed publications was performed through searches of Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct, Medline, and APA databases through 1994. A meta-analysis was performed for the correlation coefficients between SATS component scores and statistics achievement. Pooled estimates were calculated using random effects models.ResultsSATS-36 was completed by 461 medical students. Most of the students held positive attitudes towards statistics. Ability in mathematics and grade point average were associated in a multivariate regression model with the Cognitive Competence score, after adjusting for age, gender and computer ability. The results of 90 paired data showed that Affect, Cognitive Competence, and Effort scores demonstrated significant positive changes. The Cognitive Competence score showed the largest increase (M = 0.48, SD = 0.95). The positive correlation found between the Cognitive Competence score and students' achievement (r = 0.41; p<0.001), was also shown in the meta-analysis (r = 0.37; 95% CI 0.32-0.41).ConclusionStudents' subjective attitudes regarding Cognitive Competence at the beginning of the biostatistics course, which were directly linked to mathematical knowledge, affected their attitudes at the end of the course that, in turn, influenced students' performance. This indicates the importance of positively changing not only students' cognitive competency, but also their perceptions of gained competency during the biostatistics course.

Project description:BACKGROUND:An increasing number of states have laws for the legal sale of recreational and medical cannabis out of brick-and-mortar storefront locations. Given the proliferation of cannabis outlets and their potential for impact on local economies, neighborhood structures, and individual patterns of cannabis use, it is essential to create practical and thorough methods to capture the location of such outlets for research purposes. However, methods used by researchers vary greatly between studies and often do not include important information about the retailer's license status and storefront signage. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to find methods for locating and observing cannabis outlets in Los Angeles County after the period when recreational cannabis retailers were granted licenses and allowed to be open for business. METHODS:The procedures included searches of online cannabis outlet databases, followed by methods to verify each outlet's name, address, license information, and open status. These procedures, conducted solely online, resulted in a database of 531 outlets. To further verify each outlet's information and collect signage data, we conducted direct observations of the 531 identified outlets. RESULTS:We found that 80.9% (430/531) of these outlets were open for business, of which 37.6% (162/430) were licensed to sell cannabis. Unlicensed outlets were less likely to have signage indicating the store sold cannabis, such as a green cross, which was the most prevalent form of observed signage. Co-use of cannabis and tobacco/nicotine has been found to be a substantial health concern, and we observed that 40.6% (175/430) of cannabis outlets had a tobacco/nicotine outlet within sight of the cannabis outlet. Most (350/430, 81.4%) cannabis outlets were located within the City of Los Angeles, and these outlets were more likely to be licensed than outlets outside the city. CONCLUSIONS:The findings of this study suggest that online searches and observational methods are both necessary to best capture accurate and detailed information about cannabis outlets. The methods described here can be applied to other metropolitan areas to more accurately capture the availability of cannabis in an area.

Dataset Information

Quantitative investigation of inappropriate regression model construction and the importance of medical statistics experts in observational medical research: a cross-sectional study.

Objective

Study design and settings

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Quantitative investigation of inappropriate regression model construction and the importance of medical statistics experts in observational medical research: a cross-sectional study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure