Quality of reporting statistics in two Indian pharmacology journals.

Abstract

Objective:To evaluate the reporting of the statistical methods in articles published in two Indian pharmacology journals.Materials and Methods:All original articles published since 2002 were downloaded from the journals’ (Indian Journal of Pharmacology (IJP) and Indian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology (IJPP)) website. These articles were evaluated on the basis of appropriateness of descriptive statistics and inferential statistics. Descriptive statistics was evaluated on the basis of reporting of method of description and central tendencies. Inferential statistics was evaluated on the basis of fulfilling of assumption of statistical methods and appropriateness of statistical tests. Values are described as frequencies, percentage, and 95% confidence interval (CI) around the percentages.Results:Inappropriate descriptive statistics was observed in 150 (78.1%, 95% CI 71.7–83.3%) articles. Most common reason for this inappropriate descriptive statistics was use of mean ± SEM at the place of “mean (SD)” or “mean ± SD.” Most common statistical method used was one-way ANOVA (58.4%). Information regarding checking of assumption of statistical test was mentioned in only two articles. Inappropriate statistical test was observed in 61 (31.7%, 95% CI 25.6–38.6%) articles. Most common reason for inappropriate statistical test was the use of two group test for three or more groups.Conclusion:Articles published in two Indian pharmacology journals are not devoid of statistical errors.