| Title |
A primer on common statistical errors in clinical ophthalmology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Documenta Ophthalmologica, October 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10633-010-9249-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Karen Holopigian, Michael Bach |
| Abstract |
Although biomedical statistics is part of any scientific curriculum, a review of the current scientific literature indicates that statistical data analysis is an area that frequently needs improvement. To address this, we here cover some of the most common problems in statistical analysis, with an emphasis on an intuitive, tutorial approach rather than a rigorous, proof-based one. The topics covered in this manuscript are whether to enter eyes or patients into the analysis, issues related to multiple testing, pitfalls surrounding the correlation coefficient (causation, insensitivity to patterns, range confounding, unsuitability for method comparisons), and when to use standard deviation (SD) versus standard error of the mean (SEM) "antennas" on graphs. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 5% |
| Czechia | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 39 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 30% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 16% |
| Professor | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 35% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 9% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 3 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 19% |
| Unknown | 9 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 December 2012.
All research outputs
#15,247,248
of 22,671,366 outputs
Outputs from Documenta Ophthalmologica
#271
of 456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,512
of 99,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Documenta Ophthalmologica
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,671,366 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 456 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 99,386 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.