Cargando…

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

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 a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Nojima, Masanori, Tokunaga, Mutsumi, Nagamura, Fumitaka
Formato:	Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:	English
Publicado:	BMJ Publishing Group 2018
Materias:	Medical Publishing and Peer Review
Acceso en línea:	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5942431/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29730629 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021129

Ejemplares similares

Plagiarism in research: a survey of African medical journals
por: Rohwer, Anke, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Involving clinical experts in prioritising topics for health technology assessment: a randomised controlled trial
por: Cook, Andrew, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

Systematic review on the primary and secondary reporting of the prevalence of ghostwriting in the medical literature
por: Stretton, Serina
Publicado: (2014)

Systematic examination of preprint platforms for use in the medical and biomedical sciences setting
por: Kirkham, Jamie J, et al.
Publicado: (2020)

Has open data arrived at the British Medical Journal (BMJ)? An observational study
por: Rowhani-Farid, Anisa, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Open access policies of leading medical journals: a cross-sectional study
por: Ellison, Tim S, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Bias in dissemination of clinical research findings: structured OPEN framework of what, who and why, based on literature review and expert consensus
por: Bassler, Dirk, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Non-inferiority trials: are they inferior? A systematic review of reporting in major medical journals
por: Rehal, Sunita, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Conflict-of-interest disclosure at medical journals in Japan: a nationwide survey of the practices of journal secretariats
por: Kojima, Takako, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Professional medical writing support and the quality of randomised controlled trial reporting: a cross-sectional study
por: Gattrell, William T, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Performance curves of medical researchers during their career: analysis of scientific production from a retrospective cohort
por: Duclos, Antoine, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

Fate of manuscripts rejected by a non-English-language general medical journal: a retrospective cohort study
por: Vinther, Siri, et al.
Publicado: (2011)

Awareness and enforcement of guidelines for publishing industry-sponsored medical research among publication professionals: the Global Publication Survey
por: Wager, Elizabeth, et al.
Publicado: (2014)

Reporting of data on participant ethnicity and socioeconomic status in high-impact medical journals: a targeted literature review
por: Buttery, Sara C, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Reporting quality of randomised controlled trial abstracts among high-impact general medical journals: a review and analysis
por: Hays, Meredith, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Quantifying gender disparity in physician authorship among commentary articles in three high-impact medical journals: an observational study
por: Mamtani, Mira, et al.
Publicado: (2020)

Gender disparity between authors in leading medical journals during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional review
por: Misra, Vaidehi, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Does knowledge have a half-life? An observational study analyzing the use of older citations in medical and scientific publications
por: Chow, Natalie L.Y., et al.
Publicado: (2023)

Publishing at any cost: a cross-sectional study of the amount that medical researchers spend on open access publishing each year
por: Ellingson, Mallory K., et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Survey of quality and clarity of methods and results reporting in 1 year of intervention studies published in high-impact medical and psychiatric journals
por: Ravichandran, Caitlin, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Peer review comments on drug trials submitted to medical journals differ depending on sponsorship, results and acceptance: a retrospective cohort study
por: van Lent, Marlies, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Editors’ and authors’ individual conflicts of interest disclosure and journal transparency. A cross-sectional study of high-impact medical specialty journals
por: Dal-Ré, Rafael, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Cross-sectional study of the relationship between women’s representation among editors and peer reviewers in journals of the British Medical Journal Publishing Group
por: Pinho-Gomes, Ana-Catarina, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Authorship inequality: a bibliometric study of the concentration of authorship among a diminishing number of individuals in high-impact medical journals, 2008–2019
por: Hart, Kamber L, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

How often do US-based human subjects research studies register on time, and how often do they post their results? A statistical analysis of the Clinicaltrials.gov database
por: Gill, Christopher J
Publicado: (2012)

Haphazard reporting of deaths in clinical trials: a review of cases of ClinicalTrials.gov records and matched publications–a cross-sectional study
por: Earley, Amy, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

How does under-reporting of negative and inconclusive results affect the false-positive rate in meta-analysis? A simulation study
por: Kicinski, Michal
Publicado: (2014)

Poor adherence of randomised trials in surgery to CONSORT guidelines for non-pharmacological treatments (NPT): a cross-sectional study
por: Nagendran, Myura, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

Quality of descriptions of treatments: a review of published randomised controlled trials
por: Schroter, Sara, et al.
Publicado: (2012)

Occurrence and determinants of selective reporting of clinical drug trials: design of an inception cohort study
por: van den Bogert, Cornelis A, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Using simplified peer review processes to fund research: a prospective study
por: Herbert, Danielle L, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

A retrospective analysis of the effect of discussion in teleconference and face-to-face scientific peer-review panels
por: Carpenter, Afton S, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

How do scientists perceive the current publication culture? A qualitative focus group interview study among Dutch biomedical researchers
por: Tijdink, J K, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

The impact of a streamlined funding application process on application time: two cross-sectional surveys of Australian researchers
por: Barnett, Adrian G, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Conflicts of interest and spin in reviews of psychological therapies: a systematic review
por: Lieb, Klaus, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Standardised method for reporting exercise programmes: protocol for a modified Delphi study
por: Slade, Susan C, et al.
Publicado: (2014)

Does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers
por: Harris, M, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Bibliometric analysis of scientific publications in transplantation journals from Mainland China, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan between 2006 and 2015
por: Pu, Qiang-Hong, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Assessment of the extent of unpublished studies in prognostic factor research: a systematic review of p53 immunohistochemistry in bladder cancer as an example
por: Sekula, Peggy, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Data sharing through an NIH central database repository: a cross-sectional survey of BioLINCC users
por: Ross, Joseph S, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Cannot write session to /tmp/vufind_sessions/sess_q315nvs3h6ntnkesi60c4bkvqk