The Use of Statistics in Medical Research: A Comparison of Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift andWiener Medizinische Wochenschrift

To evaluate the quantity and quality of the use of statistics in Austrian medical journals, all “original research” papers in No. 116/1-12 of Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift (WKW) and 153/1-24, 154/1-24 of Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift(WMW) were screened for their statistical content. Types, frequencies and complexity of statistical methods applied weresystematically recorded. A 46-item checklist was used to evaluate statistical quality for a subgroup of papers. 74.3% of WKW papers contained inferential methods beyond descriptive statistics. Only 43.7% of WMW papers employed methods of inferential statistics. There was a statistical significant difference regarding the use of statistical methods between the two journals (p = 0:009). In addition, complexity and sophistication of statistical analysis was considerable higher for WKW papers (p = 0:02). Statistical errorsand deficiencies were identified in a large proportion of papers. Although inferential statistics were frequently identified in papers from WKW, only a minority of WMW research had analytical character. Types and frequencies of statistical errors identified, did not vary meaningful from findings of similar studies for a wide range of medical journals. There is reason to assume, that the journal impact-factor does not seem to be a powerful predictor for the statistical quality of published research.