The misuse of statistics: Concepts, tools, and a research agenda

Accountability in Research

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 65-74

  Gardenier, John S ^a   Resnik, David B ^b  

^a NATIONAL CENTER FOR HEALTH STATISTICS   (United States)

^b EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Competence; Ethics; Journals; Research misconduct; Statistics

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; ETHICS; HUMAN; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH ETHICS; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT; STATISTICS;

BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; ETHICS, RESEARCH; HUMANS; PUBLICATION BIAS; PUBLISHING; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT; STATISTICS;

EID: 85047689044     PISSN: 08989621     EISSN: 15455815     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08989620212968     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. American Statistical Association. (1999). "Ethical Guidelines for Statistical Practice. " Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association. Available at http://amstat.org/profession/ethicalstatistics.html
2. Bailar, J. (1986). Science, statistics, deception. Annals of Internal Medicine 104: 259-260.
3. Commission on Research Integrity (1995). Integrity and Misconduct in Research. Washington, DC: Public Health Service.
4. Dahlberg, J. (2000). Personal communication. Office of Research Integrity, Rockville, MD, 20 November.
5. DeMets, D. (1999). Statistics and ethics in medical research. Science and Engineering Ethics 5:97-117.
6. Deming, W. Edwards (1965). Principles of professional statistical practice. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 36: 1883-1900.
7. Easterbrook, P., et al. (1991). Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 337:867-872.
8. Grinnell, F. (1992). The Scientific Attitude. New York: The Guilford Press.
9. Guston, D. (1999). Changing explanatory frameworks in the U.S. government's attempt to define research misconduct. Science and Engineering Ethics 5:137-154.
10. Huff, D. (1954). How to Lie with Statistics. New York: W.W. Norton.
11. International Statistical Institute. (1985). Declaration on Professional Ethics. Available at http://www.cbs.nl/isi/ethics.htm
12. Ioannidis, J. (1998). Effect of the statistical significance of results on the time to completion and publication of randomized efficacy trials. JAMA 79:281-286.
13. Johnson, R., and Bhattacharyya, G. (1985). Statistics: Principles and Methods. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
14. Macrina, F. (2000). Scientific Integrity. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology Press.
15. Office of Research Integrity. (1999). Federal policy on research misconduct. Federal Register: October 14; 64, 198: 55722-55725.
16. Office of Science and Technology Policy. (2000). Federal policy on research misconduct. Available at http://www.ostp.gov/html/001207_3.html
17. Panel on Scientific Responsibility and the Conduct of Research. (1992). Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
18. Rennie, D. (1999). Fair conduct and fair reporting of clinical trials. JAMA 282:1766-1768.
19. Resnik, D. (2000). Statistics, ethics, and research: an agenda for education and reform. Accountability in Research 8:163-188.
20. Stern, J. and Simes, R. (1997). Publication bias: Evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. BMJ 315:640-645.
21. United Nations. (1994). Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics. Available at http://unstats.un.org/unsd/goodprac/bpabout.asp