STATISTICAL PRACTICES IN GENERAL SURGERY RANDOMIZED CONTROL TRIAL STUDY: AN EVALUATION OF PUBLISHED RESEARCH ARTICLES
Main Article Content
Keywords
Statistics, General surgery, Randomized control trial
Abstract
This review article evaluates the use and appropriateness of statistical methods in general surgery research articles indexed in PubMed over the past five years (2020–2025). A total of 5,388 original articles were screened, among which 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) containing the keyword “General Surgery” in the title were identified. These RCTs featured 23 statistical applications primarily focused on continuous or ordinal outcomes, with the Pearson chi-square test and Student’s t-test being the most commonly used methods. Notably, 26% of the reviewed articles showed deviations from CONSORT guidelines or omitted the “General Surgery” keyword, limiting discoverability and methodological clarity. The most frequent statistical error observed was inadequate reporting of p-values. Furthermore, only 33.3% of the studies clearly specified the statistical software used, with SPSS and STATA being the most frequently mentioned programs. An encouraging trend toward the increased and more appropriate use of statistical methods in general surgery literature, indicating growing awareness among researchers. However, the persistence of reporting issues and inconsistent software disclosure highlights the need for improved adherence to reporting
References
2. Cook JA. The challenges faced in the design, conduct and analysis of surgical randomised controlled trials. Trials. 2009;10:9.
3. Altman DG. The scandal of poor medical research. BMJ. 1994;308(6924):283.
4. Windish DM, Huot SJ, Green ML. Medicine residents’ understanding of the biostatistics and results in the medical literature. JAMA. 2007;298(9):1010–1012.
5. Emerson JD, Colditz GA. Use of statistical analysis in the New England Journal of Medicine. N Engl J Med. 1983;309(12):709–713.
6. Han K, Jung I. Trends in statistical methods in articles published in Archives of Plastic Surgery between 2012 and 2017. Arch Plast Surg. 2018;45(3):207–213. doi:10.5999/aps.2018.00010
7. Parmar A, Dubey DK, Balhara YPS, Mishra AK. Do addiction science journals endorse unbiased reporting of research? A systematic evaluation of instructions for authors. Subst Use Misuse. 2019. doi:10.1080/10826084.2019.1610444
8. Balasubramanian SP, Wiener M, Alshameeri Z, Tiruvoipati R, Elbourne D, Reed MW. Standards of reporting of randomized controlled trials in general surgery: can we do better? Ann Surg. 2006;244(5):663–667. doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000217640.11224.05
9. Wasserstein RL, Lazar NA. The ASA’s statement on p-values: context, process, and purpose. Am Stat. 2016;70:129–133.
10. Kyriacou DN. The enduring evolution of the p value. JAMA. 2016;315:1113–1115.
11. Solomon MJ, Laxamana A, Devore L, McLeod RS. Randomized controlled trials in surgery. Surgery. 1994;115(6):707–712.
12. Williams PJM, Murphy P, Van Koughnett JAM, et al. Statistical techniques in general surgery literature: what do we need to know? J Am Coll Surg. 2018;227(4):450–454.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2018.07.656
13. Robinson NB, Fremes S, Hameed I, et al. Characteristics of randomized clinical trials in surgery from 2008 to 2020: a systematic review. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(6):e2114494. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.14494
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JPTCP are licensed under Copyright Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Dharmendra Kumar Dubey
Assistant Professor, Department of Community Medicine, Baba Kinaram Autonomous State Medical College Chandauli, Government of Uttar Pradesh
Nancy Parul
Assistant Professor, Department of General Surgery, Baba Kinaram Autonomous State Medical College Chandauli, Government of Uttar Pradesh