Checklist

Statistics Guide for Research Grant Applicants


Tick [ ] those that apply

Design

  • Is the study observational? [   ]
    (see A-1.1 and A-1.2)
  • If Yes
    • Is it a cohort study? [   ]
      (see A-1.3)
    • Is it a case-control study? [   ]
      (see A-1.4)
    • Is it a cross-sectional study? [   ] (see A-1.5)
    • If Yes to cross-sectional study
      • Is it a prevalence study? [   ]
        (see A-1.5a)
      • Is it estimating sensitivity and specificity? [   ]
        (see A-1.5b and A-1.5c)
      • Is it an ecological study? [   ]
        (see A-1.5d)
    • Have you addressed the issue of confounding in your proposal? [   ]
      (see A-1.6)
  • Is the study experimental? [   ]
    (see A-1.1, A-1.2)
  • If Yes
    • Is the study a type of trial e.g. a clinical trial? [   ]
      (see A-1.7, A-1.8)
    • If Yes
      • Is the study a controlled trial (i.e. is there a control group)? [   ]
        (see A-1.8 and B-3)
      • Is it a randomised trial (i.e. are study subjects randomly allocated to groups)? [   ]
        (see A-1.8 and B-5)
      • If Yes to randomised trial
        • Is it important to have similar numbers in each randomisation group? (you may need to use blocks) [   ]
          (see B-5.6)
        • Are any known factors strongly prognostic? [   ]
          (you may need to randomise in strata)
          (see B-5.7)
        • If Yes to strongly prognostic factors
          • Is the proposed sample size small? [   ]
            (see B-5.8)
        • Are groups of individuals to be randomised together to the same treatment? [   ]
          (see B-5.9)
        • Is this a cross over trial? [   ]
          (see B-5.10b)
        • Is the assessor blind? [   ]
          (see A-1.8 and B-4)
        • Are the study subjects blind? [   ]
          (see A-1.8 and B-4)
  • Is the study prospective? [   ]
    (see A-2)
  • If Yes
    • Have you specified the length of follow up? [   ]
      (see A-2)

The Study Subjects

(see A-3)

  • Have you described where they come from? [   ]
  • Have you explained why they are an appropriate group? [   ]
  • Have you described how the study subjects will be selected? [   ]
  • Have you specified inclusion / exclusion criteria? [   ]
  • Have you specified your proposed sample size taking into account refusals/drop-outs? [   ]

Types of Variables

(see A-4)

  • Have you described all outcome and explanatory variables in terms of data type and scale of measurement? [   ]
    (see A-4.1 and A-4.2)
  • Have you described how the data will be collected? [   ]
    (see A-4.3)
  • If using a questionnaire or a non-standard measurement, have you provided information on its reliability and validity? [   ]
    (see A-4.4, A-4.4a, A-4.4b, A-4.4c)

Sample Size

  • Have you provided a sample size calculation? [   ]
    (see D-1)
  • Have you defined the outcome variable(s) used in the sample size calculation? [   ]
    (see D-5)
  • Have you defined the effect size which would be of clinical importance? [   ]
    (see D-4.5)
  • Have you described the power and significance level of the sample size calculation? [   ]
    (see D-4.3 and D-4.4)
  • Has your sample size made allowance for expected response rates and other sample attrition? [   ]
    (see D-6)
  • Is your sample size consistent with the study aims? [   ]
    (see D-7)
  • Is your sample size consistent with the proposed analysis of the study? [   ]
    (see D-7)
  • Is your description of the sample size calculation adequate? [   ]
    (See examples in D-8)

Statistical Analysis

  • Have you described the proposed statistical methods using appropriate terminology? [   ]
    (see E-1.1, E-1.2)
  • Are the proposed methods appropriate for the types of data generated by your study? [   ]
    (see E-2, E-2.1, E-11)
  • Will the assumptions made by the proposed methods hold? [   ]
    (see E-4, E-4.1)
  • Do the proposed methods take account of the structure of the data set (structure such as hierarchy, clustering, matching, paired data)? [   ]
    (see E-3, E-6, E-6.2, E-10)
  • Have important confounding factors been listed and methods of adjusting for them presented? [   ]
    (see E-5)
  • Will the proposed methods take account of multiple testing where appropriate? [   ]
    (see E-7.1, E-7.2, E-7.3, E-7.4, E-7.4a, E-7.4b, E-7.4c, E-7.4d, E-7.4e, E-7.4f)
  • Have biases due to measurement error been considered e.g. regression towards the mean? [   ]
    (see E-8)
  • Have details on the calculation of confidence intervals been provided? [   ]
    (see E-12)

For clinical trials only

  • Have you specified that your analysis will be by intention to treat? [   ]
    (see E-9)

 

Prof. Peter Kopelman Principal

Principal's welcome

Prof. Peter Kopelman

News

St George's expert leads drive to improve children's nutrition

St George’s child nutrition expert Dr Anthony Williams is heading a new government scheme to improve the nutrition of toddlers in England.

Genetically engineered tobacco plant cleans up environmental toxin

Researchers find that a new strain of tobacco plant can make antibodies to toxic pond scum that affects humans, livestock and wildlife

St George’s professor demands action on increased prescription drug abuse

The rapid global spread of prescription drug addiction must be dealt with immediately, according to the head of the International Centre for Drug Policy at St George’s, University of London.

More news…