The Use of Statistics in Medical Research: A Comparison of Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift andWiener Medizinische Wochenschrift

Abstract

To evaluate the quantity and quality of the use of statistics in Austrian medical journals, all “original research” papers in No. 116/1-12 of Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift (WKW) and 153/1-24, 154/1-24 of Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift(WMW) were screened for their statistical content. Types, frequencies and complexity of statistical methods applied weresystematically recorded. A 46-item checklist was used to evaluate statistical quality for a subgroup of papers. 74.3% of WKW papers contained inferential methods beyond descriptive statistics. Only 43.7% of WMW papers employed methods of inferential statistics. There was a statistical significant difference regarding the use of statistical methods between the two journals (p = 0:009). In addition, complexity and sophistication of statistical analysis was considerable higher for WKW papers (p = 0:02). Statistical errorsand deficiencies were identified in a large proportion of papers. Although inferential statistics were frequently identified in papers from WKW, only a minority of WMW research had analytical character. Types and frequencies of statistical errors identified, did not vary meaningful from findings of similar studies for a wide range of medical journals. There is reason to assume, that the journal impact-factor does not seem to be a powerful predictor for the statistical quality of published research.