IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pbio00/3001313.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Educating the future generation of researchers: A cross-disciplinary survey of trends in analysis methods

Author

Listed:
  • Taylor Bolt
  • Jason S Nomi
  • Danilo Bzdok
  • Lucina Q Uddin

Abstract

Methods for data analysis in the biomedical, life, and social (BLS) sciences are developing at a rapid pace. At the same time, there is increasing concern that education in quantitative methods is failing to adequately prepare students for contemporary research. These trends have led to calls for educational reform to undergraduate and graduate quantitative research method curricula. We argue that such reform should be based on data-driven insights into within- and cross-disciplinary use of analytic methods. Our survey of peer-reviewed literature analyzed approximately 1.3 million openly available research articles to monitor the cross-disciplinary mentions of analytic methods in the past decade. We applied data-driven text mining analyses to the “Methods” and “Results” sections of a large subset of this corpus to identify trends in analytic method mentions shared across disciplines, as well as those unique to each discipline. We found that the t test, analysis of variance (ANOVA), linear regression, chi-squared test, and other classical statistical methods have been and remain the most mentioned analytic methods in biomedical, life science, and social science research articles. However, mentions of these methods have declined as a percentage of the published literature between 2009 and 2020. On the other hand, multivariate statistical and machine learning approaches, such as artificial neural networks (ANNs), have seen a significant increase in the total share of scientific publications. We also found unique groupings of analytic methods associated with each BLS science discipline, such as the use of structural equation modeling (SEM) in psychology, survival models in oncology, and manifold learning in ecology. We discuss the implications of these findings for education in statistics and research methods, as well as within- and cross-disciplinary collaboration.A quantitative survey of >1 million published research articles reveals that while classical statistical methods remain in widespread use, multivariate statistical and machine-learning approaches have seen a significant increase; statistics curricula should be revised to take full advantage of these new analytical tools.

Suggested Citation

  • Taylor Bolt & Jason S Nomi & Danilo Bzdok & Lucina Q Uddin, 2021. "Educating the future generation of researchers: A cross-disciplinary survey of trends in analysis methods," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(7), pages 1-23, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pbio00:3001313
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001313
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3001313
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3001313&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001313?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Diana Lungeanu & Alina Petrica & Raluca Lupusoru & Adina Maria Marza & Ovidiu Alexandru Mederle & Bogdan Timar, 2022. "Beyond the Digital Competencies of Medical Students: Concerns over Integrating Data Science Basics into the Medical Curriculum," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-11, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pbio00:3001313. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosbiology (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.