[Evaluation of the use of statistical techniques in original articles published in the Medicina Clínica during 3 decades (1962-1992)]

The incorrect use of statistical techniques in medical articles may seriously compromise the validity of conclusions. This finding otherwise is relatively common.

A total of 84 original articles published in Medicina Clínica between 1962 and 1992 were reviewed with the aim of assessing the use and appropriateness of statistical techniques. The use of statistics, the quality of the analyses performed, and the inaccuracy of the statistical techniques used were evaluated. We also classified the statistical techniques most commonly used throughout the study period.

There was a marked increase in the use of statistical analyses, from 8.3% in 1962 to 83.3% in 1992. It should be noted that a substantial part of this increase has been due to the use of inferential tests, which accounted up to 70% in the sample of articles published in 1992. This finding, however, was associated with an increase in the number of incorrect analyses. The most common statistical errors included assumption of normal distribution of data (with no mention of the test used to confirm this fact), mistake between standard deviation and standard error of the mean, inadequate inferences on the basis of the sample size, inappropriate use of the Student's t test, chi-square test, nonparametric tests or multivariate analyses as well as misunderstanding of linear regression and correlation.

High standards in scientific research have been accompanied by a significant increase in the number of clinical studies with statistical analysis of data. However, this apparently favorable situation has been associated with an increase in the number of inaccurate analyses. It has been found that sophisticated statistical tests are rarely used in articles published in Medicina Clínica.