The Ethics of Study Analysis

Chapter

Abstract

From the medical literature one might gain the impression that data analysis is not much more than a matter of choosing the right estimators and making the appropriate adjustments for confounders. Yet the process of data analysis has important ethical and practical dimensions that are less apparent from reading research papers. In analyzing data, there are interactions among multiple persons, and critical decisions must be made for the calculation and selection of outputs for reporting. Even if the analysis plan is very well designed, each step in the analysis process is liable to becoming a source of bias, irreproducibility, inefficiency, poor documentation, disrespect for confidentiality, and even fraud. This chapter explores the causes of analytical deviances and strategies to prevent them. These topics are contextualized with discussions of the importance of ethical data analysis and the responsibilities of analysts involved in a research study.

Keywords

Analysis Dataset Data Analyst Statistical Analysis Plan Data Safety Monitoring Board Analysis Syntax 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Altman DG (1980) Statistics and ethics in medical research. V: analysing data. BMJ 281:1473–1475PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Statistical Association (1999) Ethical guidelines for statistical practice. http://www.amstat.org/about/ethicalguidelines.cfm. Accessed Sept 2012
  3. Baerlocher MO et al (2010) Data integrity, reliability and fraud in medical research. Eur J Int Med 21:40–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buyse M, George SL, Evans S et al (1999) The role of biostatistics in the prevention, detection, and treatment of fraud in clinical trials. Stat Med 18:3435–3451PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. DAMOCLES Study Group (2005) A proposed charter for clinical trial data monitoring committees: helping them to do their job well. Lancet 365:711–722Google Scholar
  6. Davis MS, Riske-Morris M, Diaz SR (2007) Causal factors implicated in research misconduct: evidence from ORI case files. Sci Eng Ethics 13:395–414PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. DeMets DL (1997) Distinctions between fraud, bias, errors, misunderstanding, and incompetence. Contr Clin Trials 18:637–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eliades T, Athanasiou AE, Papadopulos JS (2005) Ethics and fraud in science: a review of scientific misconduct and applications to craniofacial research. World J Orthodont 6:226–232Google Scholar
  9. García-Berthou E, Alcaraz C (2004) Incongruence between test statistics and P values in medical papers. BMC Med Res Methodol 4:13PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Horner J, Minifie FD (2010) Research ethics I: historical and contemporary issues pertaining to human and animal experimentation. J Speech Lang Hear Res 54:S303–S329PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. International Statistical Institute (2010) Declaration on professional ethics http://www.isi-web.org/about/ethics-intro. Accessed Sept 2012
  12. Jeng M (2006) Error in statistical tests of error in statistical tests. BMC Med Res Methodol 6:45PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Martinson BC et al (2010) The importance of organizational justice in ensuring research integrity. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 5:67–83PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Swazey J, Anderson M, Lewis K (1993) Ethical problems in academic research. Am Scientist 81:542–552Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for International Health, Faculty of Medicine and DentistryUniversity of BergenBergenNorway
  2. 2.Perelman School of MedicineUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations