Title
Statistical integrity in Prosthodontics: A narrative review
Authors
Dheeraj Deepak Kalra1,*, Snehal Vilas Thamke2, Purvi M. Bhate3, Kushal Gajendra Shinde4, Pallavi Divekar4 & Kirti Rajkumar Andhalkar5
Affiliation
1Department of Public Health Dentistry, Government Dental College & Hospital, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India; 2Department of Public Health Dentistry, SMBT Institute of Dental Science and Research, Dhamangaon, Igatpuri, Nashik, Maharashtra, India; 3Department of Public Health Dentistry, JMFs ACPM Dental College & Hospital, Dhule, Maharashtra, India; 4Department of Public Health Dentistry, CSMSS Dental College, CHH. Sambhajinagar, Maharashtra, India; 5Department of Public Health Dentistry, Late Shree YashwantraoChavan Dental college and Hospital Ahilyanagar, Maharashtra, India; *Corresponding author
Dheeraj Deepak Kalra - E-mail: drdhrj@gmail.com
Snehal Vilas Thamke - E-mail: thamkesnehal7@gmail.com
Purvi M. Bhate - E-mail: dr.purvibhate@gmail.com
Kushal Gajendra Shinde - E-mail: dr.kushalshinde@gmail.com
Pallavi Divekar - E-mail: drdivekarpallavi@gmail.com
Kirti Rajkumar Andhalkar - E-mail: dr.kirtiandhalkar@gmail.com
Article Type
Review
Date
Received January 1, 2026; Revised January 31, 2026; Accepted January 31, 2026, Published January 31, 2026
Abstract
The validity of clinical research depends on robust statistical methodology, yet peer review often fails to identify analytical flaws, particularly in Prosthodontics where statistical errors can mislead evidence-based practice. This study audited the statistical rigor of articles published in an international Prosthodontic journal during 2023. Among 41 original studies screened from 328 total publications, only one-third demonstrated rigorous, assumption-validated analyses, while nearly half showed ambiguous or inappropriate usage. Common issues included lack of assumption checks, inadequate adjustment for multiple comparisons, and missing sample size justifications. Thus, we show the urgent need for improved editorial standards, mandatory reporting checklists, and dedicated statistical review to ensure transparency and research integrity
Keywords
Prosthodontics; statistical reporting, peer review, methodological rigor, research audit
Citation
Kalra et al. Bioinformation 22(1): 593-598 (2026)
Edited by
Rashmi Laddha
ISSN
0973-2063
Publisher
License
This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. This is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License.
