Dataset Information

Tracing scientific reasoning in psychiatry: Reporting of statistical inference in abstracts of top journals 1975-2015.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To analyze the reporting of statistical inference in psychiatry.

Method

We searched 63,928 abstracts, published in 15 leading psychiatric journals (1975-2015).

Results

Median abstract length increased from 664 (1975) to 1,323 (2015) characters, and median use of numbers from two to 14/abstract. A total of 3.6% of all abstracts exclusively contained significance terminology in a nonstatistical sense, and 45% showed some form of statistical inference, increasing from 26% to 52%. In those abstracts, statistical inference based on thresholds was dominant. Its proportion decreased from 99% to 66%, but with rising numbers of articles, figures rose from 1,095 to 2,382. Although reporting p values without thresholds did not appear 40 years ago and remains rare, combining precise p values with thresholds is now common. In 2010-2015, 86% of abstracts contained p values or p value thresholds, 22% confidence intervals, and 7% confidence intervals only. Results varied across journals.

Conclusion

There is a moderate shift from reporting p values along set thresholds, such as p ? 0.05, to presenting precise p values and confidence intervals, but not as pronounced as in epidemiology and general medicine. The long debate on estimation over testing has not led to a substantial replacement of p values by confidence intervals. Null hypothesis testing ("p ? .05") dominates statistical thinking.

SUBMITTER: Baethge C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6877207 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Tracing scientific reasoning in psychiatry: Reporting of statistical inference in abstracts of top journals 1975-2015.

Baethge Christopher C Deckert Markus M Stang Andreas A

International journal of methods in psychiatric research 20180802

<h4>Objective</h4>To analyze the reporting of statistical inference in psychiatry.<h4>Method</h4>We searched 63,928 abstracts, published in 15 leading psychiatric journals (1975-2015).<h4>Results</h4>Median abstract length increased from 664 (1975) to 1,323 (2015) characters, and median use of numbers from two to 14/abstract. A total of 3.6% of all abstracts exclusively contained significance terminology in a nonstatistical sense, and 45% showed some form of statistical inference, increasing fro ...[more]

PMID: 30073728

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceSince the 1990s, reporting guidelines have developed that uniformly require authors to report a measure of precision (confidence intervals [CIs]) in addition to effect size.ObjectiveTo investigate the time trend of statistical inference and statistical reporting style in abstracts of major cancer journals.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study reviewed all abstracts published between January 1, 1990, and December 31, 2020, in 10 high-ranking cancer journals (Lancet Oncology, Journal of Clinical Oncology, Cancer Discovery, Cancer Cell, JAMA Oncology, Annals of Oncology, Molecular Cancer, Journal of Thoracic Oncology, Journal of the National Cancer Institute, and Trends in Cancer) using a previously validated computerized algorithm to search the PubMed database. For the time trend analyses, 2 journals with only a few years of existence (JAMA Oncology and Trends in Cancer) were excluded.ExposuresCalendar year, journal, and type of abstract (randomized clinical trial or other).Main outcomes and measuresProportions of abstracts containing CIs, P values without CIs, and qualitative expressions of statistical significance only were compared over time among journals.ResultsOverall, 24 034 of 42 509 abstracts (56.5%) contained statistical inference. Reporting of CIs increased over time in 5 of 8 journals. From 2016 to 2020, the most prevailing statistical reporting style was the presentation of CIs (3070 of 4895 [62.7%]). However, the proportion of abstracts reporting statistical inference based solely on the terms significant or nonsignificant was still 1195 of 4895 (24.4%) during this period and was most prevalent among basic science-oriented cancer journals (eg, 63 of 66 [95.5%] in Cancer Cell). A higher prevalence of CI reporting was associated with reporting of results from randomized clinical trials and the requirement to report according to guidelines (eg, 522 of 574 [90.9%] in Lancet Oncology).Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that the reporting style of statistical inference in abstracts of major cancer journals has improved over time. A requirement in journals' instructions for authors to present statistical inference in accordance with reporting guidelines and the implementation of these guidelines in submitted manuscripts on the part of journal editors may improve reporting.

Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate the methodological quality of randomised controlled trial (RCT) abstracts in leading critical care nursing journals against the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-Abstracts (CONSORT-A) checklist and to identify variables related with abstract reporting quality.DesignDescriptive methodological quality review.Data sourceWe searched the PubMed database and the websites of each included journal.Eligibility criteriaWe included RCT abstracts published between 2011 and 2021 in the first 11 Scopus-ranking (2021) critical care nursing journals that reported the results of RCTs in English that referred to the care of adult patients with acute/critical illness or their relatives and/or caregivers and conducted in ICUs.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent investigators extracted the data using a prespecified 17-item checklist directly derived from CONSORT-A. For the primary outcome, each item was evaluated whether it was adequately reported or not and descriptive statistics were reported. An overall score was calculated by summing the results of all items and multivariate linear regression was conducted to detect potential predictors.ResultsSeventy-eight RCT abstracts were included in this review. The items with the highest CONSORT-A adherence were authors, objective, conclusion, participants, interventions and outcome. The randomisation item had the lowest CONSORT-A adherence, followed by trial registration, funding source, harms or side effects, recruitment, blinding and outcome results. The average CONSORT-A score was 8.5±1.5 points (of the maximum 17.5 points). Multivariate analysis indicated that the categorised word score and publication date were positively associated with the overall CONSORT-A score, while the first author's country being in Asia was negatively associated with the overall CONSORT-A score.ConclusionsThe 78 RCT abstracts showed poor overall adherence to CONSORT-A. The results indicate that the methodological reporting quality of RCT abstracts in critical care nursing journals requires improvement to facilitate assessment of the applicability and relevance of the results reported.

Project description:ObjectivesRheumatology-related diseases remain a significant burden worldwide. However, little is known about the comparative status of rheumatology research between Mainland China (MC) and the world's leading countries. The aim of this study is to compare the quantity and quality of research output in the field of rheumatology that were written by researchers from MC, the USA, the UK, the Netherlands and France.MethodsBetween 2007 and 2017, all articles published in 30 rheumatology journals were identified via Science Citation Index Expanded database. The number of total and annual articles, article types (randomized controlled trials (RCTs), reviews, case reports, clinical trials and meta-analysis), impact factor (IF), citations, h-index and articles in the high-impact journals were collected for quantity and quality comparisons. The correlation of socioeconomic factors and annual publications was also analyzed.ResultsFrom 2007 to 2017, there were 53,439 articles published in rheumatology journals, of which researchers from the USA published 13,391 articles, followed by the UK, the Netherlands, France and MC with 6,179, 4,310, 4,066 and 2,898 articles, respectively. Publications from MC represented the ninth, but the number is growing rapidly. For total and average citations, MC still lags behind the other four countries in the study. Similar trends were observed in average IF, h-index and articles in the high-impact journals. In terms of article types, the USA occupies the dominant place, except for meta-analysis. The annual numbers of articles from MC and the USA were positively correlated with gross domestic product (p < 0.05).ConclusionsThe USA has played predominant role in rheumatology research for the last 11 years. The annual number of published articles from MC has increased notably from 2007 to 2017. Although MC has made progress in the number of published articles over the past decade, it still lags far behind the highly developed countries in most bibliometric indicators. Thus, the general quality of publications from MC needs further improvement.

Dataset Information

Tracing scientific reasoning in psychiatry: Reporting of statistical inference in abstracts of top journals 1975-2015.

Objective

Method

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Tracing scientific reasoning in psychiatry: Reporting of statistical inference in abstracts of top journals 1975-2015.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets