Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Quantitative Assessment of Statistical Reviews of Patient Safety Research Articles

Daniels, Jeffrey R. BS*; Dexter, Franklin MD, PhD; Espy, Jennifer L. BA; Brull, Sorin J. MD

doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000391
Original Articles
Buy
SDC

Objectives For 8.5 consecutive years, all patient safety articles of a journal underwent statistical review before publication. We sought to establish the prevalence of statistical themes in the statistical reviews, consideration of contemporary statistical methods, and their associations with time to journal receipt of authors' revision.

Methods An initial set of statistical themes was created using the statistical editor's notes. For example, for the statistical theme of “CONSORT checklist,” the search term needed was “CONSORT.” A complete (exhaustive) list of additional themes was obtained inductively.

Results Among the 273 subsequent reviews for manuscripts that were ultimately accepted, the number of paragraphs that included a theme of a statistical method was only weakly associated with longer revision times (Kendall τ = 0.139 ± 0.039, P = 0.0004). Among the total 3274 paragraphs of statistical reviews, 72.2% did not include a theme of a statistical method (e.g., the editor instead asked the authors to clarify what statistical method had been used) (95% confidence interval [CI] = 70.6%-73.7%, P < 0.0001 versus 50%).

Among the 207 manuscripts with a review that included a statistical method, 47.3% included a contemporary topic (e.g., generalized pivotal methods) (95% CI = 40.4%–54.4%). However, among the 911 corresponding paragraphs of statistical review comments, only 16.0% included a contemporary theme (95% CI = 13.7%–18.6%).

Conclusions The revised versions of patient safety articles, which are eventually to be accepted for publication, have many statistical limitations especially in the reporting (writing) of basic statistical methods and results. The results suggest a need for education of patient safety investigators to include statistical writing.

From the *University of Iowa

Department of Anesthesia, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa

Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Jacksonville, Florida.

Correspondence: Franklin Dexter, MD, PhD, Division of Management Consulting, Department of Anesthesia, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242 (e-mail: Franklin-Dexter@UIowa.edu).

The authors disclose no conflict of interest.

J.R.D. contributed in analysis of data. F.D. contributed in conception and design, acquisition of data, analysis of data, interpretation, and writing. J.L.E. contributed in acquisition of data, analysis of data, and writing. S.L.B contributed in conception and design and in writing.

J.R.D. was funded by the Vanderwilt Lunsford Fellowship grant for medical students.

Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal's Web site (www.journalpatientsafety.com).

Online date: June 7, 2017

Copyright © 2019 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved