Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23723725›Full record

ArticleJournal of family & community medicine2013

Study designs and statistical methods in the Journal of Family and Community Medicine: 1994-2010.

Abdullah S Aljoudi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of family & community medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Abdullah S AljoudiDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, King Fahad Hospital of the University, College of Medicine, University of Dammam, Al Khobar, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Journal of Family and Community Medicine (JFCM) is the official peer reviewed scientific publication of the Saudi Society of Family and Community Medicine. Unlike many peer medical journals, the contents of JFCM, have never been analyzed. The objective of this study was to perform an analysis of the contents of the JFCM over a 16-year period to discern the study designs and statistical methods used with a view to improving future contents of the journal. MATERIALS AND

methodsAll volumes of the JFCM, from 1 January 1994 to 31 December 2010 were hand searched for research articles. All papers identified as original articles were selected. For every article, the study designs and the statistical methods used were recorded. Articles were then classified according to their statistical methods and study designs. The frequency of study designs was calculated as a simple percentage of the total number of articles, while the frequency of statistical methods was calculated as a percentage of articles that used those statistical methods.

resultsA total of 229 articles were analyzed. Of these, 66 (28.8%) either reported no statistics or reported simple summaries. The cross-sectional design was used in 175 (76.4%) of all analyzed articles. Statistical methods were used in 163 (71.2%) articles. Chi-squared test was used in 111 (68.1%) articles, and t-test used in 48 (29.4%) articles. Other common statistical tests were: Regression, which was used in 35 (21.5%) articles, ANOVA used in 23 (14.1%) articles, and odds ratio and relative risk tests which were used in 22 (13.5%) articles.

conclusionsThe JFCM has a wide range of study designs and statistical methods. However, no article on experimental studies has been published in the JFCM since its inception.

Indexed as

Community medicinefamily medicineresearch methodologySaudi Arabia

Identifiers

PMID23723725
PMCPMC3663167

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.