Abstract:In recent years, there has been a decline in the quality of statistical analyses conducted on various fields of medicine in the submitted articles 1 . According to Zapf et al., biostatisticians take part in the preparation of appropriate and effective study designs and monitor their course. They are responsible for planning, conducting data analysis, and interpreting and publishing the results 2 . The latest published results show that only 39% of the 2600 accepted articles on various aspects of COVID-19 are statistically correct, which unfortunately may jeopardize the credibility of biomedical research 3 . A 1998 study by Goodman et al. found that 33% of 114 biomedical journals surveyed used a statistical review for all original articles, and 46% used a statistical review at the editor's discretion 4 . Unfortunately, no significant changes took place over the next 20 years. In an article from 2020, published in PLOS ONE, the authors stated that only 34% (36/107) of journal editors rarely or never use a specialized statistical review. Furthermore, 55% of the surveyed respondents said they paid for a statistical reviewer 5 , however, according to Goodman and colleagues, it was about one-third, which is much less 4 . The conducted research is limited in terms of the sparse number of respondents. Due to the low number of statistical reviewers, rewarding this group of people is often necessary. However, these types of people are employed primarily by more prestigious magazines that have the financial resources for this specific purpose. For this reason, it seems advisable to publish recommendations for medical journals regarding ways to find and encourage statistical reviewers to conduct an expert review of the submitted manuscript regarding the performed statistical analysis. Otherwise, there is a high probability that the situation will not change in the near future.

Common errors in statistics and methods

Common mistakes in biostatistics

An observational analysis of the trope “A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant” and other cut-and-paste statistical methods

Common Statistical Errors in Scientific Investigations: A Simple Guide to Avoid Unfounded Decisions

Statistics for the European Respiratory Journal

Pay attention to the analysis: common statistical errors in orthodontic Randomised Clinical Trials.

Recommendations to medical journals on ways to encourage statistical experts to review submissions

Addressing Common Misuses and Pitfalls of P values in Biomedical Research

Call to increase statistical collaboration in sports science, sport and exercise medicine and sports physiotherapy

Statistical guidance provided to authors by clinical neurology and neuroscience journals

Several Issues of Statistical Analysis in Clinical Research

Epidemiologic analyses with error-prone exposures: Review of current practice and recommendations

Research Design and Statistical Methods in Chinese Medical Journals

Sixty seconds on . . . spelling errors

Common Statistical Methods and Reporting of Results in Medical Research

Misuse of Statistical Methods in 10 Leading Chinese Medical Journals in 1998 and 2008

Reinventing Biostatistics Education for Basic Scientists

Study design and statistical methods in Indian medical journals

Recommendations to improve use and reporting of statistics in animal experiments

Statistical method use in public health research

Statistical Guidance to Authors at Top-Ranked Journals across Scientific Disciplines