Quantitative investigation of inappropriate regression model construction and the importance of medical statistics experts in observational medical research: a cross-sectional study.

Abstract

To investigate under what circumstances inappropriate use of 'multivariate analysis' is likely to occur and to identify the population that needs more support with medical statistics. The frequency of inappropriate regression model construction in multivariate analysis and related factors were investigated in observational medical research publications. The inappropriate algorithm of using only variables that were significant in univariate analysis was estimated to occur at 6.4% (95% CI 4.8% to 8.5%). This was observed in 1.1% of the publications with a medical statistics expert (hereinafter 'expert') as the first author, 3.5% if an expert was included as coauthor and in 12.2% if experts were not involved. In the publications where the number of cases was 50 or less and the study did not include experts, inappropriate algorithm usage was observed with a high proportion of 20.2%. The OR of the involvement of experts for this outcome was 0.28 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.53). A further, nation-level, analysis showed that the involvement of experts and the implementation of unfavourable multivariate analysis are associated at the nation-level analysis (R=-0.652). Based on the results of this study, the benefit of participation of medical statistics experts is obvious. Experts should be involved for proper confounding adjustment and interpretation of statistical models.