Skip to main content
Log in

The Use of Statistics in Health Sciences: Situation Analysis and Perspective

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Statistics in Biosciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Statistics plays a crucial role in research, planning and decision-making in the health sciences. Progress in technologies and continued research in computational statistics has enabled us to implement sophisticated mathematical models within software that are handled by non-statistician researchers. As a result, over the last decades, medical journals have published a host of papers that use some novel statistical method. The aim of this paper is to present a review on how the statistical methods are being applied in the construction of scientific knowledge in health sciences, as well as, to propose some improvement actions. From the early twentieth century, there has been a remarkable surge in scientific evidence alerting on the errors that many non-statistician researchers were making in applying statistical methods. Today, several studies continue showing that a large percentage of articles published in high-impact factor journals contain errors in data analysis or interpretation of results, with the ensuing repercussions on the validity and efficiency of the research conducted. Scientific community should reflect on the causes that have led to this situation, the consequences to the advancement of scientific knowledge and the solutions to this problem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ahmed M (2011) Meeting report: ISOSS Lahore conference. IMS Bull 40(5):11

    Google Scholar 

  2. Altman DG (1994) The scandal of poor medical research. Br Med J 308:283–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Altman DG (1998) Statistical reviewing for medical journals. Stat Med 17:2661–2674

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Altman DG (2002) Poor-quality medical research: what can journals do? J Am Med Assoc 287:2765–2767

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Altman DG, Goodman SN, Schroter S (2002) How statistical expertise is used in medical research. J Am Med Assoc 287(21):2817–2820

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Armitage P, Berry G, Matthews JNS (2002) Statistical methods in medical research, 4th edn. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Azoulay P, Zivin JSG, Manso G (2011) Incentives and creativity: evidence from the academic life sciences. RAND J Econ 42(3):527–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Basskin L (2003) Statistical interpretation can also bias research evidence. Br Med J 327(7417):752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Block WM, Morrison ML (2007) Tread lightly or carry a big stick? J Wildl Manage 71(2):301–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bornmann L, Daniel HD (2008) What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behaviour. J Doc 64(1):45–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Breen KJ (2003) Misconduct in medical research: whose responsibility? Intern Med J 33:186–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Buchan IE (2000) StatsDirect-statistical software for medical research in the 21st century. Br Med J 321:7275

    Google Scholar 

  13. Buyse M, George SL, Evans S, Geller NL, Ranstam J, Scherrer B et al (1999) The role of biostatistics in the prevention, detection and treatment of fraud in clinical trials. Stat Med 18:3435–3451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cartera RL, Scheafferb RL, Marksa RG (1986) The role of consulting units in statistics departments. Am Stat 40(4):260–264

    Google Scholar 

  15. Committee on Professional Ethics (1999) Ethical guidelines for statistical practice. American Statistical Association. www.amstat.org/about/ethicalguidelines.cfm. Accessed 17 Dec 2015

  16. De Jonge B, Louwaars N (2009) Valorizing science: whose values? EMBO Rep 10(6):535–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dormolen JV (1991) Metaphors mediating the teaching and understanding of mathematics. In: Bishop AJ, Mellin-Olsen S, Dormolen JV (eds) Mathematical knowledge: its growts through teaching. Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, pp 89–106

    Google Scholar 

  18. Dufault B, Klar N (2011) The quality of modern cross-sectional ecologic studies: a bibliometric review. Am J Epidemiol 174(10):1101–1107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ercan I, Yaz\(\imath \)c\(\imath \) B, Yang Y, Özkaya G, Cangur S, Ediz B, Kan I (2007) Misusage of statistics in medical research. Eur J Gen Med 4(3):128–134

  20. Fang FC, Steen RG, Casadevall A (2012) Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(42):17028–17033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Felson DT, Cupples LA, Meenan RF (1984) Misuse of statistical methods in arthritis and rheumatism. Arthritis Rheum 27(9):1018–1022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fernandes-Taylor S, Hyun JK, Reeder RN, Harris AHS (2011) Common statistical and research design problems in manuscripts submitted to high-impact medical journals. BMC Res Notes 4:304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Fisher R (1955) Statistical methods and scientific induction. J R Stat Soc B 17(1):69–78

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Gal I (2002) Adults’ statistical literacy: meanings, components, responsibilities. Int Stat Rev 70(1):1–51

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. García E, Alcaraz C (2004) Incongruence between test statistics and P values in medical papers. BMC Med Res Methodol 4:13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Gardner MJ, Machin D, Campbell MJ (1986) Use of check lists in assessing the statistical content of medical studies. Br Med J 292(22):810–812

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gelles RJ (1993) From yellow pads, to typewriters, to wordprocessors: confessions of a. writer?, author?, scholar? Marriage Fam Rev 18(1–2):81–92

  28. Gigerenzer G, Gaissmaier W, Kurz-Milcke E, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S (2007) Helping doctors and patients make sense of health statistics. Psychol Sci Public Interest 8(2):53–96

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hall HR, Roussel LA (2012) Evidence-based practice: an integrative approach to research, administration and practice. Jones & Bartlett Learning, Burlington

    Google Scholar 

  30. Health & Medicine Week (2004) Published research contains high level of statistical errors. 21 June, p 887

  31. Herman A, Notzer N, Libman Z, Braunstein R, Steinberg DM (2007) Statistical education for medical students: concepts are what remain when the details are forgotten. Stat Med 26(23):4344–4351

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. ISI Council (2010) Declaration on professional ethics. International Statistical Institute, Reykjavik

  33. Judson HF (2004) The great betrayal: fraud in science. Harcourt, New York

    Google Scholar 

  34. Lewis JA (1999) Statistical principles for clinical trials (ICH E9): an introductory note on an international guideline. Stat Med 18:1903–1904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Lipworth WL, Kerridge IH, Carter SM, Little M (2011) Journal peer review in context: a qualitative study of the social and subjective dimensions of manuscript review in biomedical publishing. Soc Sci Med 72:1056–1063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Marks RG, Dawson-Saunders EK, Bailar JC, Dan BB, Verran JA (1988) Interactions between statisticians and biomedical journal editors. Stat Med 7(10):1003–1011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Matcham J, Julious S, Pyke S, O’Kelly M, Todd S, Seldrup J, Day S (2011) Proposed best practice for statisticians in the reporting and publication of pharmaceutical industry-sponsored clinical trials. Pharm Stat 10:70–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Michel MC (2014) How significant are your data? The need for a culture shift. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmakol 387:1015–1016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Micheel CM, Nass SJ, Omenn GS (eds) (2012) Evolution of translational omics: lessons learned and the path forward. The National Acadamies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  40. Monmonier M (1996) How to lie with maps, 2nd edn. University of Chicago Press, London

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Moriguti S, Diggle PJ, Gower JC, Wallman KK, Ren WS (1992) The role of statisticians: report of the Ad Hoc Committee. Int Stat Rev 60(3):227–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Nicholls D (1999) Statistics into the 21st century (with discussion). Aust N Z J Stat 41(2):127

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Ocaña-Riola R (2007) The misuse of count data aggregated over time for disease mapping. Stat Med 26(24):4489–4504

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  44. Ocaña-Riola R (2010) Common errors in disease mapping. Geospat Health 4(2):139–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. OECD (2010) PISA 2009 assessment framework: key competencies in reading, mathematics and science. OECD, Paris

  46. Pike MC, Berstein L (1985) Statistical errors invalidate conclusions in “caffeine and unsaturated fat diet significantly promotes DMBA-induced breast cancer in rats”. Cancer 55(8):1855–1857

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Russell L (2011) The spread of evidence-poor medicine via flawed social-network analysis. Stat Politics Policy 2(1)

  48. Salsburg DS (1985) The religion of statistics as practiced in medical journals. Am Stat 39(3):220–223

    Google Scholar 

  49. Schafer A (2004) Biomedical conflicts of interest: a defence of the sequestration thesis learning from the cases of Nancy Olivieri and David Healy. J Med Ethics 30:8–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Schroter S, Black N, Evans S, Godlee F, Osorio L, Smith R (2008) What errors do peer reviewers detect, and does training improve their ability to detect them? J R Soc Med 101:507–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Schurz G (2014) Philosophy of science: a unified approach. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  52. Shatz D (2004) Peer review: a critical inquiry. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Maryland

    Google Scholar 

  53. Shulman LS (1986) Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educ Res 15:4–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Siegfried T (2010) Odds are, it’s wrong: science fails to face the shortcomings of statistics. Sci News 177(7):1–13

    Google Scholar 

  55. Smith D, Neutra RR (1993) Approaches to disease cluster investigations in a state health department. Stat Med 12:1757–1762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Smith R (2001) Medical editor lambasts journals and editors. Br Med J 323:651

    Google Scholar 

  57. Smith RW (2009) In search of an optimal peer review system. J Particip Med 1(1):e13

    Google Scholar 

  58. Snee R (1990) Statistical thinking and its contribution to quality. Am Stat 44:116–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Sokal A, Bricmont J (1997) Impostures intellectuelles. Odile Jacob, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  60. Starbuck WH (2005) How much better are the most-prestigious journals? The statistics of academic publication. Organ Sci 16(2):180–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Stephen LG (1985) Statistics in medical journals: a survey of current policies and proposals for editors. Med Pediatr Oncol 13(2):109–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Stuart TE, Ding WW (2006) When do scientists become entrepreneurs? The social structural antecedents of commercial activity in the academic life sciences. Am J Sociol 112(1):97–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Wang Q, Zhang B (1998) Research design and statistical methods in Chinese medical journals. J Am Med Assoc 280(3):283–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Ware JH (2005) Statistical review for medical journals. In: Armitage P, Colton T (eds) Encyclopedia of biostatistics. Harvard School of Public Health, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  65. White KL (1967) Improved medical care statistics and the health services system. Public Health Rep 82(10):847–854

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. White KL (1973) Priorities for health services information. Health Serv Rep 88(2):106–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. White SJ (1979) Statistical errors in papers in the British Journal of Psychiatry. Br J Psychiatry 135:336–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Wild CJ, Pfannkuch M (1999) Statistical thinking in empirical enquiry. Int Stat Rev 67(3):223–265

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  69. Zeger SL, Diggle PJ, Liang KY (2004) A Cox model for biostatistics of the future [Department of Biostatistics working paper]. Johns Hopkins University, Berkeley

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ricardo Ocaña-Riola.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ocaña-Riola, R. The Use of Statistics in Health Sciences: Situation Analysis and Perspective. Stat Biosci 8, 204–219 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12561-015-9138-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12561-015-9138-4

Keywords

Navigation