ArticleInternational journal of methods in psychiatric research2019
Reporting of data analysis methods in psychiatric journals: Trends from 1996 to 2018.
Article in International journal of methods in psychiatric research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using LLM-generated tools to extract information about reporting statistical software in biomedical and health science research articles.BMC research notes · 2026Article
- Conclusions reported in European Orthodontic Congress poster abstracts: are they based on clinical or statistical significance?European journal of orthodontics · 2025Article
- On the Uses and Abuses of Regression Models: A Call for Reform of Statistical Practice and Teaching.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- The Quality of Statistical Reporting and Data Presentation in Predatory Dental Journals Was Lower Than in Non-Predatory Journals.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Reporting of data analysis methods in psychiatric journals: Trends from 1996 to 2018.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2019Article
- Use of Pearson and Spearman correlation testing in Indian anesthesia journals: An audit.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe article aims to evaluate how study designs and data analysis methods in psychiatric studies have changed over the last 22 years.
methodsThis study involved a total of 320 papers published in 1996 and 2018 in the American Journal of Psychiatry, Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, British Journal of Psychiatry, and JAMA Psychiatry. We manually reviewed the articles to determine the way in which they reported the study characteristics and the methods applied in data analysis.
resultsThe statistical intensity in psychiatric journals has changed over the past 20 years. Traditional methods of testing statistical significance were widely used both in 1996 and in 2018. In 2018, there was an increase in reporting more complex methods, such as multivariable regression models, multilevel modelling, and intracluster correlation methods. However, computationally complex data mining or machine learning procedures were not adopted by psychiatric researchers.
conclusionThe increase in statistical intensity in the literature suggests that readers of prominent psychiatric journals must possess a substantial level of statistical expertise if they wish to critically evaluate the findings published in these journals. It is essential to include an awareness of this substantial change in data analysis methods in psychiatric undergraduate and postgraduate education.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.