Probability screening in manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals - An effective tool or a statistical quagmire?

Anaesthesia

Volumn 70, Issue 7, 2015, Pages 765-768

  Miller, D R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANESTHESIA; ANESTHESIOLOGICAL PROCEDURE; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PEER REVIEW; POLICY; PROBABILITY; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; RANDOM SAMPLE; RANDOMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RESPONSE VARIABLE; RESPONSIBILITY; REVIEW; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT; SCREENING; SIMULATION; HUMAN;

HUMANS; PROBABILITY; RANDOM ALLOCATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84930869204     PISSN: 00032409     EISSN: 13652044     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/anae.13165     Document Type: Review

References (16)

1. Shafer S,. Tattered threads. Anesthesia and Analgesia 2009; 108: 1361-3.
2. Moore RA, Derry S, McQuay HJ,. Fraud or flawed: adverse impact of fabricated or poor quality research. Anaesthesia 2010; 65: 327-30.
3. Kranke P, Apfel CC, Roewer N, Fujii Y,. Reported data on granisetron and postoperative nausea and vomiting by Fujii et al. are incredibly nice! Anesthesia and Analgesia 2000; 90: 1004-7.
4. Miller DR,. Retraction of articles written by Dr. Yoshitaka Fujii. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia 2012; 59: 1081-88.
5. Carlisle JB,. The analysis of 168 randomised controlled trials to test data integrity. Anaesthesia 2012; 67: 521-37.
6. Carlisle JB, Dexter F, Pandit JJ, Shafer SL, Yentis SM,. Calculating the probability of random sampling for continuous variables in submitted or published controlled trials. Anaesthesia 2015; 70: 848-58.
7. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, For the CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Annals of Internal Medicine 2010; 152: 726-32.
8. Smith TMF,. On the validity of inferences from non-random samples. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 1983; 14: 394-403.
9. Atomic Heritage Foundation. Computing and the Manhattan Project. www.atomicheritage.org/history/computing-and-manhattan-project (accessed 30/04/2014).
10. Mooney CZ,. Monte Carlo Simulation. Sage University Paper series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07-116. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1997.
11. Yentis SM,. Lies, damn lies, and statistics. Anaesthesia 2012; 67: 455-6.
12. Haldane JBS,. The faking of genetical results. Eureka 1964; 27: 21-4.
13. Hill J, Sawilowsky S,. Bias in Monte Carlo simulations due to pseudo random number generator initial seed selection. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods 2011; 10: 29-50.
14. Yentis S, Committee on Publication Ethics. Sharing of Information among Editors-in-Chief Regarding Possible Misconduct. COPE, 2015. http://publicationethics.org/files/Sharing%20-of-Information-Among-EiCs-guidelines-web-version.pdf (accessed 10/05/2015).
15. Sessler DI, Kurz A,. Departmental and institutional strategies for reducing fraud in clinical research. Anesthesia and Analgesia 2012; 115: 474-6.
16. Committee on Publication Ethics. Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, v.4. COPE, 2011. http://publicationethics.org/files/Code%20of%20Conduct.pdf (accessed 10/05/2015).