Skip to main content
PMC home page
British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Ed.) logoLink to British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Ed.)
. 1986 Mar 22;292(6523):810–812. doi: 10.1136/bmj.292.6523.810

Use of check lists in assessing the statistical content of medical studies.

M J Gardner, D Machin, M J Campbell
PMCID: PMC1339731  PMID: 3082452

Abstract

Two check lists are used routinely in the statistical assessment of manuscripts submitted to the "BMJ." One is for papers of a general nature and the other specifically for reports on clinical trials. Each check list includes questions on the design, conduct, analysis, and presentation of studies, and answers to these contribute to the overall statistical evaluation. Only a small proportion of submitted papers are assessed statistically, and these are selected at the refereeing or editorial stage. Examination of the use of the check lists showed that most papers contained statistical failings, many of which could easily be remedied. It is recommended that the check lists should be used by statistical referees, editorial staff, and authors and also during the design stage of studies.

Full text

PDF
810

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Altman D. G., Gore S. M., Gardner M. J., Pocock S. J. Statistical guidelines for contributors to medical journals. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1983 May 7;286(6376):1489–1493. doi: 10.1136/bmj.286.6376.1489. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Altman D. G. Statistics and ethics in medical research: III How large a sample? Br Med J. 1980 Nov 15;281(6251):1336–1338. doi: 10.1136/bmj.281.6251.1336. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bland J. M., Jones D. R., Bennett S., Cook D. G., Haines A. P., MacFarlane A. J. Is the clinical trial evidence about new drugs statistically adequate? Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1985 Feb;19(2):155–160. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1985.tb02626.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Dean J. W., Fowler P. B. Exaggerated responsiveness to thyrotrophin releasing hormone: a risk factor in women with coronary artery disease. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1985 May 25;290(6481):1555–1561. doi: 10.1136/bmj.290.6481.1555. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Gardner M. J., Altman D. G. Confidence intervals rather than P values: estimation rather than hypothesis testing. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1986 Mar 15;292(6522):746–750. doi: 10.1136/bmj.292.6522.746. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Gardner M. J., Altman D. G., Jones D. R., Machin D. Is the statistical assessment of papers submitted to the "British Medical Journal" effective? Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1983 May 7;286(6376):1485–1488. doi: 10.1136/bmj.286.6376.1485. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. George S. L. Statistics in medical journals: a survey of current policies and proposals for editors. Med Pediatr Oncol. 1985;13(2):109–112. doi: 10.1002/mpo.2950130215. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hannaway P. J., Hopper G. D. Severe anaphylaxis and drug-induced beta-blockade. N Engl J Med. 1983 Jun 23;308(25):1536–1536. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Henkin R. I., Schecter P. J., Friedewald W. T., Demets D. L., Raff M. A double blind study of the effects of zinc sulfate on taste and smell dysfunction. Am J Med Sci. 1976 Nov-Dec;272(3):285–299. doi: 10.1097/00000441-197611000-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Langman M. J. Towards estimation and confidence intervals. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1986 Mar 15;292(6522):716–716. doi: 10.1136/bmj.292.6522.716. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Lionel N. D., Herxheimer A. Assessing reports of therapeutic trials. Br Med J. 1970 Sep 12;3(5723):637–640. doi: 10.1136/bmj.3.5723.637. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Schiffman S. S. Taste and smell in disease (first of two parts). N Engl J Med. 1983 May 26;308(21):1275–1279. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198305263082107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Smith R. Conference Report: Steaming up windows and refereeing medical papers. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1982 Oct 30;285(6350):1259–1261. doi: 10.1136/bmj.285.6350.1259. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Stevenson D. D., Simon R. A., Mathison D. A. Aspirin-sensitive asthma: tolerance to aspirin after positive oral aspirin challenges. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1980 Jul;66(1):82–88. doi: 10.1016/0091-6749(80)90143-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Szczeklik A., Gryglewski R. J., Nizankowska E. Asthma relieved by aspirin and by other cyclo-oxygenase inhibitors. Thorax. 1978 Oct;33(5):664–665. doi: 10.1136/thx.33.5.664. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Vaisrub N. Manuscript review from a statistician's perspective. JAMA. 1985 Jun 7;253(21):3145–3147. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from British Medical Journal (Clinical research ed.) are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES