Pre-Submission Statistical ReviewMedical questionnaire research support
Key considerations when reviewing existing statistical results, data preparation, analysis strategies, supplementary analyses, and the presentation of findings in a manuscript before journal submission.
We received an inquiry and research data from a researcher affiliated with Juntendo University concerning statistical analysis of questionnaire data related to a medical condition and checks prior to manuscript submission. The inquiry appears to concern a pre-submission statistical review and consultation, rather than only producing descriptive summaries or conducting a new analysis.
Pre-Submission Statistical Review for Medical Survey Research | Data, Methods, Tables and Figures
| Research support, statistics and manuscript review
Consultation overviewBased on the inquiry and materials received, the areas to consider include the validity of existing statistical results, data handling, the appropriateness of analytical methods, possible additional analyses, and how findings are presented in tables, figures and text. This article does not state that any review or analysis has been completed, or that the results have been validated.
The condition, individual participants, questionnaires, numerical data, findings and unpublished manuscript materials are not disclosed here. This article does not indicate an official endorsement or institutional partnership with the university.
Five Areas to Examine in a Statistical Review Before Submission
A meaningful review considers more than whether the statistical software generated an output. It examines whether the research question, data-processing decisions, analytical methods, interpretation and manuscript reporting form a coherent and traceable whole. The five areas below reflect the potential scope of this consultation.
| Review area | Questions to examine | Relevant manuscript sections |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Validity of existing results | Check descriptive summaries, denominators, analysis sample sizes, test statistics, estimates, confidence intervals, p-values and alignment between results and interpretations. | Results, tables, figures, Abstract |
| 2. Data handling | Review variable definitions, coding, scale direction, categorisation, missing data, exclusions, duplicates, outliers and documentation of the analysis population. | Methods, participant flow, Table 1 |
| 3. Methods and analysis strategy | Assess alignment with research objectives, outcomes, predictors, measurement scales, survey design, sample size and relevant model assumptions. | Statistical Analysis, Results |
| 4. Need for further analyses | Consider, where justified, potential confounders, covariates, sensitivity analyses, alternative models or additional materials. | Methods, supplementary materials, Discussion |
| 5. Tables, figures and reporting | Examine titles, footnotes, units, abbreviations, consistency between text and displays, causal language and journal formatting requirements. | Tables, Figures, Results, Discussion |
Note: This is a generalised checklist, not a claim that deficiencies have been identified in a particular data set. Actual review items depend on the study design and materials.
Figure 1. A Practical Review Workflow
- STEP 1Research question and journalConfirm objectives, hypotheses, manuscript and submission instructions
- STEP 2Data and current outputsCheck variable definitions, missing data, sample summaries and outputs
- STEP 3Analytical strategyAssess method suitability and whether further analysis is justified
- STEP 4Manuscript consistencyCheck correspondence among results, tables, figures and notes
- STEP 5Potential revisionsOrganise priorities and outstanding questions for the researcher
This diagram illustrates a possible workflow. It does not imply that these steps have already been performed or completed for the inquiry described.
Review Both the Numbers and Their Interpretation
Reported proportions and summary statistics should be consistent with the relevant analysis sample sizes. Statistical estimates, test results, tables and manuscript statements should tell the same story. Interpreting results requires more than inspecting p-values: effect sizes, confidence intervals, assumptions and the relationship to the research question also matter.
It may also be necessary to distinguish prespecified primary analyses from exploratory analyses and to evaluate the implications of multiple testing. A statistical review must not manufacture findings or promise statistically significant results.
Check Missing Data, Variable Coding and Analysis Populations
Questionnaire data may require careful handling of unanswered items, response codes, reverse-coded questions, composite scores, exclusion criteria and outliers. These decisions can affect the analysis and should be documented so that the sample sizes and denominators reported in the manuscript can be explained and, where feasible, reproduced.
Information about health conditions requires handling that is consistent with the study protocol, ethical approvals, institutional policies and applicable consent. This article contains no participant-level data or information identifying the medical condition.
Determine Additional Analyses From the Research Objective
Appropriate methods depend on the type of outcome, measurement schedule, independence of observations, research design, available variables and sample size. For example, covariate adjustment, sensitivity analysis or alternative models should be considered only when there is a defensible research rationale and the data support them.
The objective is not to add analyses for their own sake, but to identify the checks needed to answer the research question responsibly. No particular model or additional variable is presented here as having been selected for this inquiry.
Align Methods, Results, Tables and Figures for Submission
The Methods section should match the analyses reported in Results, while numerical statements should be consistent with tables and figures. Sample sizes, rounding conventions, units, abbreviations, statistical notations and footnotes are all possible items for a final consistency check. The Discussion should not make causal claims beyond what the design and evidence support.
Statistical reporting and figure/table requirements vary across journals and article types. When a target journal is known, its author instructions and relevant study-design reporting guidance should be consulted.
How iBooks Academic Support Approaches Such Inquiries
Based on the researcher's materials and objectives, iBooks Academic Support can discuss the scope of statistical-output review, data handling and methods checks, potential further analyses, and consistency checks for manuscript tables, figures and text. Specific deliverables and schedules depend on the submitted materials and agreed scope.
Learn more about our statistical analysis support. The researcher retains responsibility for interpretation, final decisions and journal submission. Neither statistical significance nor publication acceptance can be guaranteed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q. Can an existing statistical analysis be reviewed before journal submission?
Yes. Existing output tables, analysis results, research plans and variable definitions can inform a review of calculations, interpretation and consistency with the manuscript. What can be verified depends on the materials available.
Q. Is additional statistical analysis always necessary?
No. The need for additional analyses depends on the research question, survey design, sample size, variable types, current results and journal requirements. Analyses should not be added merely to obtain statistical significance.
Q. Does this article disclose the medical condition or participant data?
No. It does not identify the condition, participants, numerical findings or unpublished research results. It describes only the consultation scope and general review considerations.
SummaryAn effective pre-submission review connects statistical results, data preparation, method selection, the rationale for further analyses, and consistency across manuscript text and displays. The review priorities should be tailored to the study and the materials actually available.
Related Keywords
#StatisticalReview #MedicalStatistics #SurveyDataAnalysis #JournalSubmission #ManuscriptPreparation
Publication note: This article generalises the scope of a consultation. It does not represent completed analysis, validated results, acceptance of a journal article, or institutional endorsement or partnership.
Contact
Please describe the research question, available statistical outputs, variable definitions, manuscript stage, target journal and the type of review you need. We will assess the available materials before discussing scope, schedule and fees.
When orders are busy, phone lines may be difficult to connect. We will reply in order, so urgent inquiries should be sent byEmailplease contact us by this method.
