Download PDFPDF

Quantitative investigation of inappropriate regression model construction and the importance of medical statistics experts in observational medical research: a cross-sectional study
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

  • Published on:
    Discussion of “A quantitative investigation of inappropriate use of model selection and the importance of medical statistics experts in observational medical research: a cross-sectional study ” by Nojima, Tokunaga and Nagamura
    • Anthony Atkinson, Professor, Department of Statistics London School of Economics

    The problem is the method used in practice for the selection of variables to be included in logistic regression and Cox models in observational medical studies.

    The motivation comes from the authors’ work as statistical consultants. Many medical researchers had the idea that only variables which were individually significant should be included in the fitted model. This is in contrast to the correct procedure in which the model should contain variables that are jointly significant. To find these models requires fitting several models and selecting the best, rather than fitting just one. An example is in Table 1 below.

    The paper presents the results of a survey in which the frequency of an incorrect method of variable selection was measured as a function of the assessed statistical expertise of the authors of the papers: first author, any other author or none. The expertise was based on the authors’ departmental affiliations. It was found that the frequency of correct variable selection increased with the statistical qualifications of the authors. Clinical trials, as opposed to observational studies, were not included.

    The authors also consider how the situation might be improved. A breakdown of the results by country from papers in which the first author is not an expert shows North America and Northern Europe show relatively high expert involvement compared with East Asia, which have a lower involvement. Taiwan is an exception. In the authors’ own cou...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.