Changes in study design, gender issues, and other characteristics of clinical research published in three major medical journals from 1971 to 1991

McDermott, Mary M.; Lefèvre, Frank; Feinglass, Joe; Reifler, Douglas; Dolan, Nancy C.; Potts, Steven; Senger, Kathleen

doi:10.1007/bf02599570

Cited by 50 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, limiting the analysis to the 384 clinical research papers revealed that cross-sectional studies comprised 53.9% of the oral and maxillofacial radiology clinical studies, which is greater than the 22%-44% of clinical research papers published in the general medical literature between 1946 and 1991 that were crosssectional studies. 7,8 Cohort and case-control studies combined comprised 2.1% of our total study sample of 725 papers, which is comparable with the 2% found in the paediatric dentistry literature. 22 Experimental studies comprised only 1% of our total sample, whereas they comprise 9% of the paediatric dentistry literature 22 and 17% of the English-language literature regarding therapy for temporomandibular disorders.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 69%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clinical research and diagnostic efficacy studies in the oral and maxillofacial radiology literature: 1996–2005

Patel²,

Hirt³

et al. 2011

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine the level of evidence that is published in the oral and maxillofacial radiology (OMR) literature. Methods: OMR papers published in Dentomaxillofacial Radiology and Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology and Endodontology between 1996 and 2005 were classified using epidemiological study design and diagnostic efficacy hierarchies. The country of origin and number of authors were noted. Results: Of the 725 articles, 384 could be classified with the epidemiological study design hierarchy: 155 (40%) case reports/series and 207 (54%) cross-sectional studies. The distribution of study designs was not statistically significant across time (Fisher's exact test, P 5 0.06) or regions (P 5 0.89). The diagnostic efficacy hierarchy was applicable to 246 articles: 71 (29%) technical efficacy and 166 (67%) diagnostic accuracy studies. The distribution of efficacy levels was not statistically significant across time (P 5 0.22) but was significant across regions (P , 0.01). Authors from Japan produced 26% of the papers with a mean ¡ standard deviation of 5.78 ¡ 1.98 authors per paper (APP); American authors, 23% (3.78 ¡ 1.72 APP); and all others, 51% (3.76 ¡ 1.51 APP). Conclusion: The OMR literature consisted mostly of case reports/series, cross-sectional, technical efficacy and diagnostic accuracy studies. Such studies do not provide strong evidence for clinical decision making nor do they address the impact of diagnostic imaging on patient care. More studies at the higher end of the study design and efficacy hierarchies are needed in order to make wise choices regarding clinical decisions and resource allocations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 69%

“…In 1991, a follow-up analysis based on the same three journals revealed an increase in the use of strong research designs. 8 From 1971 to 1991, clinical trials increased from 17% to 35% and case series decreased from 30% to 4%. No changes were noted in cross-sectional, cohort or case-control studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical research and diagnostic efficacy studies in the oral and maxillofacial radiology literature: 1996–2005

Patel²,

Hirt³

et al. 2011

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The types of statistical designs/methods and the quality of statistical and methodological reporting in medical publications have been established in anesthesia [47] , internal medicine [48] , bone and joint surgery [49] , clinical trials [50] , otolaryngology [51] , rehabilitation [52,53] , ophthalmology [54] , as well as for abstracts [55,56] and various journals: Transfusion [57] , New England Journal of Medicine [58,59] , Arthritis and Rheumatism [60] , and Chinese medical journals [61] . …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Statistical Applications in Publications on Alzheimer’s Disease

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aims: To evaluate statistical applications in publications on Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Methods: Three instruments/checklists were developed: Assessment of Statistical Reporting (ASR; 44 items), Survey of Statistical Designs (SSD; 10 items), and Survey of Statistical Methods (SSM; 7 items). After a pilot testing on 5 AD publications, the instruments/checklists were revised and tested for reliability with a sample of 30 AD articles and for validity with another sample of 10 AD articles from MEDLINE. Results: Item-specific test-retest and interrater reliability for ASR ranged from 0.29 to 1.0 with the associated standard errors (SEs) ranging from 0.01 to 0.31. The test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.88–0.97) and the interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.69–0.92) for the overall score of ASR were high. The correlational validity of the ASR with a published checklist was also high (r = 0.74, SE = 0.24). The item-specific test-retest reliability in SSD and SSM ranged from 0.58 to 1.00 with the associated SEs ranging from 0.01 to 0.32. The item-specific interrater reliability in SSD and SSM ranged from 0.17 to 1.00 with the associated SEs ranging from 0.01 to 0.22. Conclusions: This study suggested that it was feasible to assess statistical applications in AD publications.

show abstract

“…But as early as the 1990s, case reports and series were losing favor among general medical journals. Among JAMA, NEJM, and Lancet, the proportion of case reports decreased from 42% to 8% from 1971-1991 [2]. Some journals, such as the BMJ, refuse to publish them.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The power of the case report

Tomaszewski

2006

J. Med. Toxicol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Changes in study design, gender issues, and other characteristics of clinical research published in three major medical journals from 1971 to 1991

Cited by 50 publications

References 14 publications

Clinical research and diagnostic efficacy studies in the oral and maxillofacial radiology literature: 1996–2005

Clinical research and diagnostic efficacy studies in the oral and maxillofacial radiology literature: 1996–2005

Assessing Statistical Applications in Publications on Alzheimer’s Disease

The power of the case report

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About