E-ISSN 1305-3612
Biostatistics - Original Article
Statistical errors in articles published in radiology journals
1 Department of Biostatistics, SANKO University School of Medicine, Gaziantep, Turkey  
2 Department of Biostatistics, Uludağ University School of Veterinary Medicine, Bursa, Turkey  
3 Department of Biostatistics, Uludağ University, Health Science Institute, Bursa, Turkey  
4 Department of Biostatistics, Uludağ University, Health Science Institute, Bursa, Turkey;Social Security Program, Düzce University Social Sciences Vocational High School, Düzce, Turkey  
5 -Department of Biostatistics, Uludağ University, Health Science Institute, Bursa, Turkey;Department of Biostatistics, İzmir Katip Çelebi University School of Medicine, İzmir, Turkey  
6 Department of Radiology, Dokuz Eylül University School of Medicine, İzmir, Turkey  
7 Department of Biostatistics, Uludağ University School of Medicine, Bursa, Turkey  
Diagn Interv Radiol 2019; 25: 102-108
DOI: 10.5152/dir.2018.18148
Abstract

PURPOSE

We aimed to evaluate articles in radiology journals indexed in the Science Citation Index or Science Citation Index Expanded in terms of statistical errors. By this means, we aim to contribute to the production of high quality scientific publications.

 

METHODS

In this study, a total of 157 articles published in 2016–2017 in 20 radiology journals were reviewed randomly. Selected articles were evaluated for statistical errors regarding P values and statistical tests, and for errors in terminology and other errors related to interpretation. In addition, in order to examine whether the error rates of the articles published in the radiology journals differed according to the impact factor, the statistical errors were compared according to the impact factors of the journals.

 

RESULTS

Of the 157 articles published in radiology journals, 10 had  no statistical errors, while 147 had at least one statistical error. The most frequently encountered error was “errors in summarizing data” with a rate of 66%. This was followed by “incorrect representation of P values” with a rate of 42%. The least frequently encountered error was “statistical symbol errors” with a rate of 3%. There was no statistically significant difference according to impact factors.

 

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, radiology journals, as do journals in different fields, include articles containing statistical errors. Even when the quality of the journal increases, there is no difference in these statistical error rates. In order to prevent statistical errors in manuscripts, there are responsibilities for both the researchers who conduct scientific studies and the editors who publish these studies in their journals. Researchers should have a basic statistical knowledge, and the editor must submit all manuscripts for a statistical review.

 

 

You may cite this article as: Günel Karadeniz P, Uzabacı E, Atış Kuyuk S, et al. Statistical errors in articles published in radiology journals. Diagn Interv Radiol 2019; 25:102–108.

Key Words
Authors
All
Author's Corner
Reviewer's Corner
Survey
Copyright © 2019 Turkish Society of Radiology | Latest Update: 05.07.2019