Published research contains "high level of statistical errors"May 26, 2004Evidence based practice is currently in vogue, and basing medical practice on published evidence is clearly a good idea, but what if the published findings are inaccurate? An article published this week in BMC Medical Research Methodology shows that a large proportion of articles in top science and medical journals contain statistical errors, 4% of which may have caused non-significant findings to be misrepresented as being significant. Thirty-eight percent of the Nature papers and a quarter of the BMJ articles studied contained at least one statistical error, according to Emili Garc'a-Berthou, a lecturer on biostatistics at University of Girona, Spain, and Carles Alcaraz. In total, more than 11% of the statistical results published in the two journals during 2001 were incongruent. "Our findings confirm that the quality of research and scientific papers needs improvement and should be more carefully checked and evaluated in these days of high publication pressure," write the authors. The errors seen could have been caused by transcription or typesetting errors, for example if a repeated zero was omitted. Alternatively, researchers may have rounded up figures incorrectly. The researchers showed that some numbers, four and nine, were seen less often than would be expected at the end of a given test statistic or P-value, suggesting that researchers were rounding up numbers incorrectly, possibly so that they looked 'neater'. For example study authors might round up 2.38 to 2.5 rather than 2.4. "Although these kinds of errors may leave the conclusions of a study unchanged, they are indicative of poor practice," say the researchers. "Our concern is that these kinds of errors are probably present in all numerical results and all steps of scientific research, with potentially important practical consequences." The researchers suggest that one way to minimise the effect of these errors would be for published authors to make their raw data freely available on the Internet. This would allow other researchers to check for themselves whether the results of the study are correct and the conclusions justified. "Also, fraud and sloppiness may be more easily detected," they say. | |||||||||||||||||||||
Science Research Departments
Earth Science Alternative Energy | Anthropology and Archaeology | Earthquakes and Volcanoes | Environment and Nature News | Global Warming | High-Energy and Particle Physics | Ozone Hole | Scientists Slow Light | Tsunami Space Science Astronomy and Space News | Black Holes | Chandra X-Ray Observatory | Extrasolar Planets | Hubble Telescope | International Space Station | Jupiter Galileo Mission | Jupiter Cassini Mission Flyby | Mars Exploration | Mars Odyssey 2001 | Mars Global Surveyor | Mars Polar Lander | Mars Climate Orbiter | Mars Pathfinder | Meteors and Asteroids | Mir Space Station | NEAR Asteroid Probe Mission | Pluto Planet Debate | Search for Extraterrestrial Life | Space Shuttle Program | Space Shuttle Mission: STS-102 | Space Weather Life Science Animal News | Biotechnology and Genetics | Brain Research | Human Cloning | Dinosaur and Fossil Discoveries | Endangered Species | Gene Therapy | Genetically Modified Food | Stem Cell Research | Whales and Whaling |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||