Cargando…

Why we need to report more than 'Data were Analyzed by t-tests or ANOVA'

Transparent reporting is essential for the critical evaluation of studies. However, the reporting of statistical methods for studies in the biomedical sciences is often limited. This systematic review examines the quality of reporting for two statistical tests, t-tests and ANOVA, for papers publishe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Weissgerber, Tracey L, Garcia-Valencia, Oscar, Garovic, Vesna D, Milic, Natasa M, Winham, Stacey J
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6326723/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30574870
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.36163
_version_ 1783386353163042816
author Weissgerber, Tracey L
Garcia-Valencia, Oscar
Garovic, Vesna D
Milic, Natasa M
Winham, Stacey J
author_facet Weissgerber, Tracey L
Garcia-Valencia, Oscar
Garovic, Vesna D
Milic, Natasa M
Winham, Stacey J
author_sort Weissgerber, Tracey L
collection PubMed
description Transparent reporting is essential for the critical evaluation of studies. However, the reporting of statistical methods for studies in the biomedical sciences is often limited. This systematic review examines the quality of reporting for two statistical tests, t-tests and ANOVA, for papers published in a selection of physiology journals in June 2017. Of the 328 original research articles examined, 277 (84.5%) included an ANOVA or t-test or both. However, papers in our sample were routinely missing essential information about both types of tests: 213 papers (95% of the papers that used ANOVA) did not contain the information needed to determine what type of ANOVA was performed, and 26.7% of papers did not specify what post-hoc test was performed. Most papers also omitted the information needed to verify ANOVA results. Essential information about t-tests was also missing in many papers. We conclude by discussing measures that could be taken to improve the quality of reporting.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6326723
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63267232019-01-11 Why we need to report more than 'Data were Analyzed by t-tests or ANOVA' Weissgerber, Tracey L Garcia-Valencia, Oscar Garovic, Vesna D Milic, Natasa M Winham, Stacey J eLife Human Biology and Medicine Transparent reporting is essential for the critical evaluation of studies. However, the reporting of statistical methods for studies in the biomedical sciences is often limited. This systematic review examines the quality of reporting for two statistical tests, t-tests and ANOVA, for papers published in a selection of physiology journals in June 2017. Of the 328 original research articles examined, 277 (84.5%) included an ANOVA or t-test or both. However, papers in our sample were routinely missing essential information about both types of tests: 213 papers (95% of the papers that used ANOVA) did not contain the information needed to determine what type of ANOVA was performed, and 26.7% of papers did not specify what post-hoc test was performed. Most papers also omitted the information needed to verify ANOVA results. Essential information about t-tests was also missing in many papers. We conclude by discussing measures that could be taken to improve the quality of reporting. eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd 2018-12-21 /pmc/articles/PMC6326723/ /pubmed/30574870 http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.36163 Text en © 2018, Weissgerber et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Human Biology and Medicine
Weissgerber, Tracey L
Garcia-Valencia, Oscar
Garovic, Vesna D
Milic, Natasa M
Winham, Stacey J
Why we need to report more than 'Data were Analyzed by t-tests or ANOVA'
title Why we need to report more than 'Data were Analyzed by t-tests or ANOVA'
title_full Why we need to report more than 'Data were Analyzed by t-tests or ANOVA'
title_fullStr Why we need to report more than 'Data were Analyzed by t-tests or ANOVA'
title_full_unstemmed Why we need to report more than 'Data were Analyzed by t-tests or ANOVA'
title_short Why we need to report more than 'Data were Analyzed by t-tests or ANOVA'
title_sort why we need to report more than 'data were analyzed by t-tests or anova'
topic Human Biology and Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6326723/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30574870
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.36163
work_keys_str_mv AT weissgerbertraceyl whyweneedtoreportmorethandatawereanalyzedbyttestsoranova
AT garciavalenciaoscar whyweneedtoreportmorethandatawereanalyzedbyttestsoranova
AT garovicvesnad whyweneedtoreportmorethandatawereanalyzedbyttestsoranova
AT milicnatasam whyweneedtoreportmorethandatawereanalyzedbyttestsoranova
AT winhamstaceyj whyweneedtoreportmorethandatawereanalyzedbyttestsoranova