Lack of confidence interval reporting in dermatology: a call to action. (1st April 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hopkins, Z.H.; Moreno, C.; Secrest, A.M.
• Is Part Of: British journal of dermatology. Volume 180:Number 4(2019)
• Page Start: 910
• Page End: 915
• Publication Date: 2019-04-01
• Subjects: Dermatology -- Periodicals; Skin -- Diseases -- Periodicals; 616.5
• DOI: 10.1111/bjd.17126
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0007-0963

Abstract

Summary: Background: Confidence intervals (CIs) offer a complete and intuitive presentation of results and are more informative than P ‐values. The current prevalence of CI reporting in the dermatology literature has not been discussed. Objectives: To evaluate CI reporting prevalence in the dermatology literature, factors predicting reporting and to compare CI reporting in the dermatology literature with dermatology research in the New England Journal of Medicine ( NEJM ). Methods: MEDLINE was queried for trials and observational studies published from 2007 to 2017 in six dermatology journals with varying impact factors: British Journal of Dermatology, Journal of Investigative Dermatology, JAMA Dermatology, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, European Journal of Dermatology and Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology . Randomly selected studies were reviewed to calculate CI reporting prevalence, and logistic regression identified factors predictive of CI reporting. Results: Of 97 studies meeting the inclusion criteria, only 21 (22%; 95% CI 14–31%) reported CIs for the primary outcome. Of the remaining 76 studies, 43 reported a measure of variance (57%; 95% CI 45–67%). More recent year of publication was the strongest predictor for CI reporting [odds ratio 1·44; 95% CI 1·10–1·89 ( P = 0·01)] in multivariable analysis. CI reporting in NEJM was significantly higher than in the dermatology literature (64% vs. 22%; P < 0·001). Conclusions: CI reporting in the dermatology literature is low. We urge both dermatology journals and researchers to improve clinical interpretation of study results by taking steps to increase CI reporting.