CRITICAL APPRAISAL SERIES
Critical appraisal for emergency medicine 2: Statistics
Correspondence to:
Professor S Goodacre, Medical Care Research Unit, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield S1 4DA, UK; s.goodacre@sheffield.ac.uk
Accepted 6 January 2008
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Critical appraisal of the statistical aspects of an article can be taxing for anyone without expert knowledge. It is tempting to seek out statistical "rules" that can be used to identify flaws in a study, but few situations are sufficiently cut and dried to allow such a crude approach. It is worth bearing in mind that statistics is a specialist field. The idea of a clinician dabbling in statistics should alarm us as much as the idea of a statistician dabbling in clinical medicine.
Statistics should help readers, not baffle them. The findings of nearly all quantitative medical research are subject to a degree of uncertainty arising from random error, as described in the first article in this series. Appropriate use of statistics should help the reader to understand how the findings of a study may be influenced by this uncertainty. The most useful way of appraising the statistical aspects
Relevant Article
- Primary survey
- Jonathan Wyatt
Emerg. Med. J. 2008 25: 319.[Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Register for free content
The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.
Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.
