SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Statistical Methods in Medical Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Murray, G. D
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Murray, G. D
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Promoting good research practice

Gordon D Murray

Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh Medical School, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, UK, gordon.murray{at}ed.ac.uk

Embarking on a new millennium provides the stimulus both to take stock and also to look forward. In the field of medical statistics there is much to make us feel proud and excited. Rapid methodological developments together with parallel developments in computer technology have enormously expanded our statistical repertoire. At the same time, the high profile attained by the evidence-based medicine movement means that the importance of our discipline is recognized more widely then ever before. However, any medical statistician who is involved in medical publishing, or who is even a regular reader of the medical literature, must be aware of the yawning chasm between what is recognized as good statistical practice and what is actually published. Poor study design, inappropriate analysis and selective reporting are commonplace. In my opinion the most important challenge currently facing our profession is the task of bridging this chasm.

Statistical Methods in Medical Research, Vol. 9, No. 1, 17-24 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/096228020000900103
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 BMJHome page
T. McAlindon, M. Formica, K. Kabbara, M. LaValley, and M. Lehmer
Conducting clinical trials over the internet: feasibility study
BMJ, August 30, 2003; 327(7413): 484 - 487.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BMJHome page
G. Mires, F. Williams, P. Howie, S. Goldbeck-Wood, G. D Murray, and B.-I. Nesheim
Randomised controlled trial of cardiotocography versus Doppler auscultation of fetal heart at admission in labour in low risk obstetric population Commentary: changes between protocol and manuscript should be declared at submission Commentary: research governance must focus on research training Commentary: Approach to power calculations has to be realistic
BMJ, June 16, 2001; 322(7300): 1457 - 1462.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ANN INTERN MEDHome page
D. G. Altman, K. F. Schulz, D. Moher, M. Egger, F. Davidoff, D. Elbourne, P. C. Gotzsche, T. Lang, and for the CONSORT Group
The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration
Ann Intern Med, April 17, 2001; 134(8): 663 - 694.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Advertisement