Category archive: Statistics

European Statistical Forum

I shall be speaking at the European Statistical Forum in Verona later this week, about the role of medical writers in reporting clinical trials. It’s a topic close to my heart, about which I have spoken many times before, but usually to audiences of medical writers. It will be nice to speak to a different audience and make the statistical community more aware of some of the issues of publication ethics.

Dettol protects: fact or fiction?

Readers in the UK (and possibly further afield, for all I know) will probably have seen a TV advert for a household disinfectant called Dettol, which has the strapline “Dettol protects: fact”. We are generally shown pictures of mummies with cute little kids and told how important it is to keep the kids protected, so the mummies clean their kitchens with Dettol. There is a clear implication that doing so will keep the little ones protected from nasty germs and … Continue reading

An economic analysis of which journal to choose for your publication

I saw a fascinating question asked on Twitter the other day about choosing a journal for submission of your latest research paper. The question was asked by @deevybee (aka Prof Dorothy Bishop from Oxford University), who had been discussing the best target journal with a colleague (let’s call him “Al”, as we all know that a great many co-authors on papers seem to have that name). Dorothy wanted to submit to PLoS One, whereas Al wanted to submit to a … Continue reading

More dodgy statistics

Back in April, I wrote that perhaps I should start a “dodgy statistic of the month competition”. OK, May and June have been and gone with no more nominations, so I’ll make up for it by nominating 3 for July. The first nomination goes to Vince Cable. This surprises me, as he is one of the few politicians we have who more often than not actually talks sense. Nonetheless, earlier this month he gave a speech in which he gave … Continue reading

New Lancet policy on systematic reviews

The Lancet have recently introduced an interesting new policy. They now require anyone submitting the results of research (not just randomised trials, apparently, but all research) to The Lancet to include a systematic review with their research. This can be a reference to a recently published systematic review, but if no such review exists, then the authors are required to do their own systematic review and report it within the paper. Now, the intention behind this idea is entirely laudable. … Continue reading

Worrying scientific illiteracy among our elected representatives

Thanks to the wonders of Twitter, I have just found out (via @bengoldacre and @DrEvanHarris) that one of our esteemed elected representatives, David Tredinnick MP, has tabled 3 Early Day Motions singing the praises of homoeopathy. Oh dear. These EDMs are based on 3 published papers in the peer reviewed literature, which claim to show homoeopathy is effective. As anyone who has taken the workshop that I run for EMWA on critical reading of medical literature will know, just because … Continue reading

Toothbrushing and cardiovascular disease

Today’s health story of toothbrushing and cardiovascular disease shows an association, not causation. Health journalists: please try to learn about the difference. Continue reading

Sausages, steaks, and socioeconomic status

A story in the news today tells us that sausages (and indeed other kinds of processed meats) increase your risk of cardiovascular disease, whereas steaks (and other forms of unprocessed read meats) do not. This is based on a study published in Circulation, which rather annoyingly, is behind a paywall, so I haven’t read the full paper. The study was done at the Harvard School of Public Health, and shame on them for not making their research freely available in … Continue reading

EMWA conference, day 4

Well, the EMWA conference is all over now, and I am safely back in London, having cunningly dodged the ash cloud by a rather small margin on both my outward and return journeys. The final day of the conference began with a plenary lecture about the importance of compliance with promotional codes, such as that by the ABPI, when writing materials that could be used for promotional purposes.  One of the great challenges in this area is that codes are … Continue reading

Evidence based footcare part 2

As an update to my earlier post about some foot cream that was supposed to stop me getting blisters when training for and running in the Brighton Marathon, I now have the results. I used the cream on my left foot, but not on my right, for about 3 weeks before the race. At the end of the race, I had one blister on each foot. The blister on my right foot was one that I’d gained during training before … Continue reading