Scientific rigour in psycho-oncology trials: why and how to avoid common statistical errors.

OBJECTIVE: It is well documented that statistical and methodological flaws are common in much of the health research literature, including psycho-oncology. These can have far-reaching effects, including the publishing of misleading results; the wasting of time, effort, and financial resources; expos...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Psycho-Oncology Vol. 22; no. 3; pp. 499 - 506
Autores principales: Bell, Melanie L, Olivier, Jake, King, Madeleine T
Formato: research Journal Article
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell Mar2013
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=104243512&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 104243512
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        10579249
        O9K
      jtl: Psycho-Oncology
      issn: 10579249
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Mar2013
      vid: 22
      iid: 3
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
      place: Malden, Massachusetts
    artinfo:
      ui:
        104243512
        2012026506
        10.1002/pon.3046
        NLM22315186
        104243512
      ppf: 499
      ppct: 7
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: Scientific rigour in psycho-oncology trials: why and how to avoid common statistical errors.
      aug:
        au:
          Bell, Melanie L
          Olivier, Jake
          King, Madeleine T
        affil: Psycho-Oncology Cooperative Research Group, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
      sug:
        subj:
          Clinical Trials Methods
          Neoplasms Psychosocial Factors
          Statistics Methods
          Human
          Study Design
          Sample Size
      ab: OBJECTIVE: It is well documented that statistical and methodological flaws are common in much of the health research literature, including psycho-oncology. These can have far-reaching effects, including the publishing of misleading results; the wasting of time, effort, and financial resources; exposure of patients to the potential harms of research and decreased confidence in science and researchers by the public. METHODS: Several of the most common statistical errors and methodological pitfalls that occur in the field of psycho-oncology are discussed, including those that occur at the design, analysis, reporting and conclusion stages. RESULTS: Fourteen topics are briefly discussed, explaining why there is a problem and how to avoid it. These include proper approaches to power, clustering, missing data, categorization of continuous variables, subgroup analyses, multiple comparisons, statistical interactions, confidence intervals and correct interpretation of p-values. Extensive referencing points the reader to more in-depth explanations. CONCLUSIONS: To increase the scientific rigour in psycho-oncology, researchers should involve a biostatistician from the beginning of the study and should commit to continuing education on best practices in the fields of statistics and reporting. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        research
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N