Inappropriate use of standard error of the mean when reporting variability of study samples: A critical evaluation of four selected journals of obstetrics and gynecology

Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 53, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 26-29

  Ko, Wen Ru ^a,b   Hung, Wei Te ^a,b   Chang, Hui Chin ^a,b   Lin, Long Yau ^a,b  

^a CHUNG SHAN MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^b CHUNG SHAN MEDICAL UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Impact factor; Prescriptive statistics; Standard deviation; Standard error of the mean; Variability of study sample

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; GYNECOLOGIST; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; OBSTETRICIAN; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TAIWAN; UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL; GYNECOLOGY; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; MEDICAL RESEARCH; OBSTETRICS; PUBLICATION; STANDARDS;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; GYNECOLOGY; HUMANS; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; OBSTETRICS; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84899099253     PISSN: 10284559     EISSN: 18756263     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tjog.2013.04.035     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Hemminki E. Quality of reports of clinical trials submitted by the drug industry to the Finnish and Swedish control authorities. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1981, 19:157-165.
2. Schor S., Karten I. Statistical evaluation of medical journal manuscripts. JAMA 1966, 195:1123-1128.
3. Gore S.M., Jones G., Thompson S.G. The Lancet's statistical review process: area for improvement by authors. Lancet 1992, 340:100-102.
4. White S.J. Statistical errors in papers in the British Journal of Psychiatry. Br J Psychiatry 1979, 135:336-342.
5. Neely J.G., Stewart M.G., Hartman J.M., Forsen J.W., Wallace M.S. Tutorials in clinical research, part VI: descriptive statistics. Laryngoscope 2002, 112:1249-1255.
6. Altman D.G., Gore S.M., Gardner M.J., Pocock S.J. Statistical guidelines for contributors to medical journals. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1983, 286:1489-1493.
7. Lang T. Twenty statistical errors even you can find in biomedical research articles. Croat Med J 2004, 45:361-370.
8. Charan J., Saxena D. Suggested statistical reporting guidelines for clinical trials data. Indian J Psychol Med 2012, 34:25-29.
9. Krithikadatta J., Valarmathi S. Research methodology in dentistry: Part II - The relevance of statistics in research. JConserv Dent 2012, 15:206-213.
10. Nagele P. Misuse of standard error of the mean (SEM) when reporting variability of a sample. A critical evaluation of four anaesthesia journals. Br J Anaesth 2003, 90:514-516.
11. Jaykaran, Yadav P. Quality of reporting statistics in two Indian pharmacology journals. JPharmacol Pharmacother 2011, 2:85-89.
12. Saurabh M.K. Misuse of standard error of mean (SEM) when reporting variability of a sample: A critical appraisal of four Indian journals. JPharm Res 2010, 3:277-279.
13. Herxheimer A. Misuse of the standard error of the mean. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1988, 26:197.
14. Jaykaran "Mean ± SEM" or "Mean (SD)"?. Indian J Pharmacol 2010, 42:329. [Letter].
15. Malagon I. Standard error of the mean or standard deviation-does it matter?. Anaesthesia 1996, 51:609. [Letter].
16. Webster C.S., Merry A.F. The standard deviation and the standard error of the mean. Anaesthesia 1997, 52:183. [Letter].
17. Garfield E. Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science 1972, 178:471-479. [Letter].
18. Lindsey D. Using citation counts as measure of quality in science: measuring what's measurable rather than what's valid. Scientometrics 1989, 15:189-203.
19. Case D.O., Higgins G.M. How can we investigate citation behavior? A study ofreasons for citing literature in communication. JAm Soc Inf Sci 2000, 51:635-645.
20. Garfield E. Can citation index be automated?. Statistical association methods for mechanized documentation 1965, 189-192. National Bureau of Standards, Washington, DC. M. Stevens, V. Guiliano, L. Heilprin (Eds.).