Research methodology and analytic techniques used in the Journal Obstetrics & Gynecology.
other
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 16203723.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
To quantify trends over time in the research methodology and statistical reporting of published articles in the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology between the years 1991 and 2001. We reviewed 226 articles reporting original clinical research in Obstetrics & Gynecology, including 75 consecutive articles from 1991 and 1996 and 76 consecutive studies from 2001. Articles were classified by research methodology and level of evidence: I for randomized trials; II for controlled trials and observational, analytic studies; and III for case reports or case series. We also noted whether the investigators reported a research hypothesis, P values, effect sizes, 95% confidence intervals, and sample size/power calculations. We calculated chi2 for linear trend to evaluate changes over this 10-year period. Seventy-four percent of the 226 studies evaluated were level II. The percentage of randomized trials did not increase from 1991 to 2001. However, level II studies increased from 71% in 1991 to 88% in 2001 (P = .01). During the same period, level III studies (case reports and case series) declined from 19% in 1991 to 1% in 2001 (P < .001). We also noted that a clearly stated research hypothesis, effect measures (and respective confidence intervals), and sample size calculations were more common in more recent years. In the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology, we noted that observational, analytic studies increased in frequency, anecdotal reports decreased, and statistical reporting has improved. However, there still exists considerable opportunities for improvement.
Medical subject headings
- Gynecology
- Obstetrics
- Periodicals as Topic
- Research Design
- Statistics as Topic