• Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, Medical College, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266021, China;
ZHOUXiao-bin, Email: xiaobin_zhou@126.com
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Objective To investigate the application status of survival analysis in studies published in Chinese oncology journals, and assess their reporting quality and summarize the existing problems, so as to promote the application of survival analysis and reporting quality. Methods Studies that used survival analysis were collected from 1 492 studies published in Chinese Journal of Oncology, Chinese Journal of Clinical Oncology, Chinese Journal of Radiation Oncology and Chinese Journal of Cancer Prevention and Treatment in 2013. The application status of survival analysis of included studies was analysed and their reporting quality was evaluated. Results A total of 242 survival analysis studies were included. Among them, the utilization rates of Kaplan-Meier method, life table method, log-rank test, Breslow test and Cox proportional hazards model were 91.74%, 3.72%, 78.51%, 0.41% and 46.28%, respectively. 112 studies did multivariate analysis through Cox proportional hazards model. A total of 396 end points and 10 different types of survival time were reported. Overall survival (OS) was reported in 233 studies (92.15%). Survival terms were defined to 158 end points (39.90%) of 103 studies (42.56%). The follow-up rates were mentioned in 155 studies (64.05%), of which 4 studies were under 80% and the lowest was 75.25%, 55 studies were 100%. The main problems of survival analysis studies published in Chinese journals were as follows:None of the studies which used Cox proportional hazards model reported the proportional hazards assumption. None of the studies used the method of parametric survival analysis. 130 studies (53.72%) did not use the method of multiple factor analysis. 139 studies (57.44%) did not define the survival terms. Only 11 of 100 studies which reported loss to follow-up had stated how to treat it in the analysis. None of the studies reported the methods of calculating sample size. None of the studies reported the censoring proportion. Conclusion The methods of survival analysis are used in a low rate in studies published in Chinese oncology journals, and the overall reporting quality of survival analyses is poor. So the reporting guideline of survival analysis should be developed and the authors should be encouraged to cooperate with professional statisticians, in order to improve the design, analysis and reporting quality of survival analysis studies.

Citation: LUBin, ZHOUXiao-bin, ZHANGYing-ying. Reporting Quality Assessment of Survival Analyses in Studies Published in Chinese Oncology Journals. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2015, 15(9): 1098-1102. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.20150181 Copy

  • Previous Article

    The Lived Experience of Parents Caring for Preterm Infants after Discharge from Hospital:A Systematic Review and Meta Synthesis of Qualitative Studies
  • Next Article

    Rapid Advice Guideline and Its Methodology: An Introduction