# Statistical characteristics of analytical studies published in Peruvian medical journals from 2021 to 2022: A methodological study

## TL;DR

This study analyzed the statistical quality of medical research published in Peruvian journals from 2021 to 2022 and found significant methodological shortcomings.

## Contribution

The study provides a methodological evaluation of statistical reporting in Peruvian medical journals, highlighting areas for improvement.

## Key findings

- Most articles did not report sample size calculations, with 78.3% omitting this detail.
- Only 13.4% of articles controlled for confounding and explained their criteria for doing so.
- Descriptive and bivariate statistics were common, but measures of association were rarely used.

## Abstract

While statistical analysis plays a crucial role in medical science, some published studies might have utilized suboptimal analysis methods, potentially undermining the credibility of their findings. Critically appraising analytical approaches can help elevate the standard of evidence and ensure clinicians and other stakeholders have trustworthy results on which to base decisions. The aim of the present study was to examine the statistical characteristics of original articles published in Peruvian medical journals in 2021–2022.

We performed a methodological study of articles published between 2021 and 2022 from nine medical journals indexed in SciELO-Peru, Scopus, and Medline. We included original articles that conducted analytical analyses (i.e., association between variables). The statistical variables assessed were: statistical software used for analysis, sample size, and statistical methods employed (measures of effect), controlling for confounders, and the method employed for confounder control or epidemiological approaches.

We included 313 articles (ranging from 11 to 77 across journals), of which 67.7% were cross-sectional studies. While 90.7% of articles specified the statistical software used, 78.3% omitted details on sample size calculation. Descriptive and bivariate statistics were commonly employed, whereas measures of association were less common. Only 13.4% of articles (ranging from 0% to 39% across journals) presented measures of effect controlling for confounding and explained the criteria for selecting such confounders.

This study revealed important statistical deficiencies within analytical studies published in Peruvian journals, including inadequate reporting of sample sizes, absence of measures of association and confounding control, and suboptimal explanations regarding the methodologies employed for adjusted analyses. These findings highlight the need for better statistical reporting and researcher-editor collaboration to improve the quality of research production and dissemination in Peruvian journals.