Statistical Reporting Quality in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Journals: A Comparative Analysis of SCI-E and
Tuğba Şahbaz1, Gülsev Özen Yorgancıgil2, Ahmet Dirican3
1Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, İstanbul Beykent University Faculty of Medicine, İstanbul, Türkiye ; Department of Biostatistics, İstanbul - Cerrahpaşa University Faculty of Medicine, İstanbul, Türkiye.
Background:
To evaluate statistical reporting quality and methodological errors in clinical research articles published in physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) journals indexed in Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-E) and Turkish National Citation Index (TR Dizin).
Methods:
This cross-sectional methodological study analyzed original clinical research articles published between January 2024 and January 2025 in 18 PM&R journals indexed in SCI-E and TR Dizin. Articles were evaluated using predefined criteria based on Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement, the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement, and the Statistical Analyses and Methods in the Published Literature (SAMPL) guidelines. Statistical reporting practices, methodological indicators, and transparency indicators were assessed. Comparisons between journal groups were performed using Pearson's chi-square or Fisher's exact tests.
Results:
A total of 433 articles were included, of which 358 (82.7%) were published in SCI-E journals and 75 (17.3%) in TR Dizin journals. Mean ± SD was reported in 93.1% of articles, whereas median-based statistics were reported in 47.3%. Normality testing was performed in 72.7% of studies. Effect size reporting was observed in 51.0% of articles. SCI-E journals reported effect sizes more frequently than TR Dizin journals (53.1% vs. 36.0%, P = .004). P reporting errors were more common in TR Dizin journals (21.3% vs. 8.9%, P = .002).
Conclusion:
Statistical reporting deficiencies remain common in PM&R clinical research articles. Although SCI-E indexed journals demonstrate relatively better adherence to recommended statistical practices, important methodological shortcomings persist in both indexing groups. Strengthening statistical education and improving editorial oversight may enhance the methodological quality of rehabilitation research. Cite this article as: Şahbaz T, Yorgancıgil GÖ, Dirican A. Statistical reporting quality in physical medicine and rehabilitation journals: A comparative analysis of SCI-E and TR indexed publications. Eurasian J Med. 2026, 34, 1511, doi: 10.5152/ eurasianjmed.2026.261 511.
