Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

Reporting your results for publication according to guidelines

Graeme Hickey
October 03, 2016

Reporting your results for publication according to guidelines

Presented at the 30th Annual EACTS Meeting, Barcelona, Spain (1-5 October 2016)

Graeme Hickey

October 03, 2016
Tweet

More Decks by Graeme Hickey

Other Decks in Research

Transcript

  1. How to perform more advanced statistics: basics and pitfalls Graeme

    L. Hickey Department of Biostatistics, University of Liverpool * No conflicts of interest
  2. None
  3. URL: http://www.oxfordjournals.org/our_journals/ejcts/for_authors/manuscript_instructions.html

  4. Development and validation of risk prediction models Clinical randomized trials

    Systematic reviews and meta-analyses Comprehensive database of guidelines www.equator-network.org
  5. URL: http://www.consort-statement.org Supplemental file for manuscript submission Manuscript figure

  6. None
  7. + corrigendum: Eur J Cardio-Thoracic Surg 2016;49:1024.

  8. • Above all

  9. Examples* of common ‘issues’ (which are covered in the EJCTS

    and ICVTS guidelines) * A somewhat haphazard collection
  10. None
  11. * Austin, P. C. (2007). Propensity-score matching in the cardiovascular

    surgery literature from 2004 to 2006: a systematic review and suggestions for improvement. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 134(5), 1128–35.
  12. à

  13. Table 1. Patient and operative characteristics data by CPB technique

    with statistical comparison. 518 Overall On-pump Off-pump Δ (%) P Total number n=3402 n=1173 n=2229 Logistic EuroSCORE (%) 2.4 ± 2.5 2.4 ± 2.8 2.3 ± 2.3 1.8 0.965 Age (years) 61.7 ±10.6 61.1 ± 10.3 61.9 ± 10.7 -8.1 0.026 BMI (kg/m2) 28.5 ± 4.6 28.7 ± 4.7 28.4 ± 4.5 6.1 0.090 N % N % N % Female 880 25.9% 325 27.7% 555 24.9% 6.4 0.083 Preoperative AF 69 2.0% 28 2.4% 41 1.8% 3.8 0.343 Urgent 733 21.5% 271 23.1% 462 20.7% 5.7 0.119 NYHA III/IV 645 19.0% 225 19.2% 420 18.8% 0.9 0.846 History of neurological dysfunction 53 1.6% 25 2.1% 28 1.3% 6.8 0.070 Diabetes (insulin or diet controlled) 600 17.6% 207 17.6% 393 17.6% 0.0 >0.999 * Continuous data reported as mean ± standard deviation Percentages correctly rounded Appropriate and consistent precision Columns clearly labeled Notation defined Units included Number of subjects sum correctly
  14. 0 200 400 600 800 1000 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6

    0.8 1.0 Time CumSum An unacceptably presented Kaplan−Meier graph P<.05 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 6 12 18 24 30 Time from diagnosis (months) Survival probability Male Female 138 86 35 17 7 2 90 70 30 15 6 1 No. at risk + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + ++ + + ++ + ++ + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + An acceptably presented Kaplan−Meier graph Log−rank test P = 0.001
  15. [1] https://www.biostat.wisc.edu/~kbroman/topten_worstgraphs/ [2] https://garstats.wordpress.com/2016/05/27/the-percentile-bootstrap/ • Statistical figures are for summarizing

    complex data • Readers will be drawn to them, so they need to be clearly presented • Label all axes – and report what is being shown
  16. Interpreting randomized trial data: Tuesday 4th October 14:15 - 15:45

  17. None
  18. Editorial Board Friedhelm Beyersdorf (Editor-in- Chief) Joel Dunning (Associate Editor)

    Judy Gaillard (Managing Editor) Franziska Lueder (Editorial Manager) Assistant Editors (Statistical Consultants) Burkhardt Seifert Gottfried Sodeck Matthew J. Carr Hans Ulrich Burger Graeme L. Hickey + all other editorial members