Design and statistical analysis of oral medicine studies: Common pitfalls

L. Baccaglini, J. J. Shuster, J. Cheng, D. W. Theriaque, V. J. Schoenbach, S. L. Tomar, C. Poole

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A growing number of articles are emerging in the medical and statistics literature that describe epidemiologic and statistical flaws of research studies. Many examples of these deficiencies are encountered in the oral, craniofacial, and dental literature. However, only a handful of methodologic articles have been published in the oral literature warning investigators of potential errors that may arise early in the study and that can irreparably bias the final results. In this study, we briefly review some of the most common pitfalls that our team of epidemiologists and statisticians has identified during the review of submitted or published manuscripts and research grant applications. We use practical examples from the oral medicine and dental literature to illustrate potential shortcomings in the design and analysis of research studies, and how these deficiencies may affect the results and their interpretation. A good study design is essential, because errors in the analysis can be corrected if the design was sound, but flaws in study design can lead to data that are not salvageable. We recommend consultation with an epidemiologist or a statistician during the planning phase of a research study to optimize study efficiency, minimize potential sources of bias, and document the analytic plan.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)233-241
Number of pages9
JournalOral Diseases
Volume16
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2010

Fingerprint

Oral Medicine
Tooth
Research
Literature
Manuscripts
Organized Financing
Research Design
Referral and Consultation
Research Personnel
Epidemiologists

Keywords

  • Bias
  • Epidemiology
  • Guideline
  • Methods
  • Public health
  • Statistics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology
  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Baccaglini, L., Shuster, J. J., Cheng, J., Theriaque, D. W., Schoenbach, V. J., Tomar, S. L., & Poole, C. (2010). Design and statistical analysis of oral medicine studies: Common pitfalls. Oral Diseases, 16(3), 233-241. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-0825.2009.01634.x

Design and statistical analysis of oral medicine studies : Common pitfalls. / Baccaglini, L.; Shuster, J. J.; Cheng, J.; Theriaque, D. W.; Schoenbach, V. J.; Tomar, S. L.; Poole, C.

In: Oral Diseases, Vol. 16, No. 3, 01.04.2010, p. 233-241.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Baccaglini, L, Shuster, JJ, Cheng, J, Theriaque, DW, Schoenbach, VJ, Tomar, SL & Poole, C 2010, 'Design and statistical analysis of oral medicine studies: Common pitfalls', Oral Diseases, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 233-241. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-0825.2009.01634.x
Baccaglini L, Shuster JJ, Cheng J, Theriaque DW, Schoenbach VJ, Tomar SL et al. Design and statistical analysis of oral medicine studies: Common pitfalls. Oral Diseases. 2010 Apr 1;16(3):233-241. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-0825.2009.01634.x
Baccaglini, L. ; Shuster, J. J. ; Cheng, J. ; Theriaque, D. W. ; Schoenbach, V. J. ; Tomar, S. L. ; Poole, C. / Design and statistical analysis of oral medicine studies : Common pitfalls. In: Oral Diseases. 2010 ; Vol. 16, No. 3. pp. 233-241.
@article{3c6df1c20a974624b41309a4b7903d3b,
title = "Design and statistical analysis of oral medicine studies: Common pitfalls",
abstract = "A growing number of articles are emerging in the medical and statistics literature that describe epidemiologic and statistical flaws of research studies. Many examples of these deficiencies are encountered in the oral, craniofacial, and dental literature. However, only a handful of methodologic articles have been published in the oral literature warning investigators of potential errors that may arise early in the study and that can irreparably bias the final results. In this study, we briefly review some of the most common pitfalls that our team of epidemiologists and statisticians has identified during the review of submitted or published manuscripts and research grant applications. We use practical examples from the oral medicine and dental literature to illustrate potential shortcomings in the design and analysis of research studies, and how these deficiencies may affect the results and their interpretation. A good study design is essential, because errors in the analysis can be corrected if the design was sound, but flaws in study design can lead to data that are not salvageable. We recommend consultation with an epidemiologist or a statistician during the planning phase of a research study to optimize study efficiency, minimize potential sources of bias, and document the analytic plan.",
keywords = "Bias, Epidemiology, Guideline, Methods, Public health, Statistics",
author = "L. Baccaglini and Shuster, {J. J.} and J. Cheng and Theriaque, {D. W.} and Schoenbach, {V. J.} and Tomar, {S. L.} and C. Poole",
year = "2010",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1601-0825.2009.01634.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "233--241",
journal = "Oral Diseases",
issn = "1354-523X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Design and statistical analysis of oral medicine studies

T2 - Common pitfalls

AU - Baccaglini, L.

AU - Shuster, J. J.

AU - Cheng, J.

AU - Theriaque, D. W.

AU - Schoenbach, V. J.

AU - Tomar, S. L.

AU - Poole, C.

PY - 2010/4/1

Y1 - 2010/4/1

N2 - A growing number of articles are emerging in the medical and statistics literature that describe epidemiologic and statistical flaws of research studies. Many examples of these deficiencies are encountered in the oral, craniofacial, and dental literature. However, only a handful of methodologic articles have been published in the oral literature warning investigators of potential errors that may arise early in the study and that can irreparably bias the final results. In this study, we briefly review some of the most common pitfalls that our team of epidemiologists and statisticians has identified during the review of submitted or published manuscripts and research grant applications. We use practical examples from the oral medicine and dental literature to illustrate potential shortcomings in the design and analysis of research studies, and how these deficiencies may affect the results and their interpretation. A good study design is essential, because errors in the analysis can be corrected if the design was sound, but flaws in study design can lead to data that are not salvageable. We recommend consultation with an epidemiologist or a statistician during the planning phase of a research study to optimize study efficiency, minimize potential sources of bias, and document the analytic plan.

AB - A growing number of articles are emerging in the medical and statistics literature that describe epidemiologic and statistical flaws of research studies. Many examples of these deficiencies are encountered in the oral, craniofacial, and dental literature. However, only a handful of methodologic articles have been published in the oral literature warning investigators of potential errors that may arise early in the study and that can irreparably bias the final results. In this study, we briefly review some of the most common pitfalls that our team of epidemiologists and statisticians has identified during the review of submitted or published manuscripts and research grant applications. We use practical examples from the oral medicine and dental literature to illustrate potential shortcomings in the design and analysis of research studies, and how these deficiencies may affect the results and their interpretation. A good study design is essential, because errors in the analysis can be corrected if the design was sound, but flaws in study design can lead to data that are not salvageable. We recommend consultation with an epidemiologist or a statistician during the planning phase of a research study to optimize study efficiency, minimize potential sources of bias, and document the analytic plan.

KW - Bias

KW - Epidemiology

KW - Guideline

KW - Methods

KW - Public health

KW - Statistics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77949637592&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77949637592&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1601-0825.2009.01634.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1601-0825.2009.01634.x

M3 - Review article

C2 - 19874532

AN - SCOPUS:77949637592

VL - 16

SP - 233

EP - 241

JO - Oral Diseases

JF - Oral Diseases

SN - 1354-523X

IS - 3

ER -