Skip Navigation

If you wish to respond to a paper or other item already published in the BJA, please go to the abstract/full text version of that item and click on the link "E-Letters: Submit a response to the article".

Electronic Letters to:

Clinical Investigation:
M. Rantanen, A. Yli-Hankala, M. van Gils, H. Yppärilä-Wolters, P. Takala, M. Huiku, M. Kymäläinen, E. Seitsonen, and I. Korhonen
Novel multiparameter approach for measurement of nociception at skin incision during general anaesthesia{dagger}{ddagger}
Br. J. Anaesth. 2006; 0: ael005v1 [Abstract] [PDF]
*E-letters: Submit a response to this article

Electronic letters published:

[Read E-letter] Multivariable not multiparameter
Neville W Goodman   (13 March 2006)

Multivariable not multiparameter 13 March 2006
Top
Neville W Goodman,
Consultant Anaesthetist
Southmead Hospital, Bristol, BS10 5NB, UK

Send letter to journal:
Re: Multivariable not multiparameter

Almost always, and certainly for Rantanen and co-workers, what have been measured are variables not parameters. The distinction between the two terms is illustrated in the description of their statistics. If they have been measuring parameters, then what sense does it make to write of using the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test? Earlier, they tested post- and pre-incision values of parameters using the Wilcoxon signed rank test - but that is a nonparametrically based test, so what can they mean? It is no wonder that researchers seem confused.

One can argue that the meaning is clear from the context, but why not use the proper words instead? These authors are unlikely to have english as their first language, and so should perhaps be forgiven. I cannot be so forgiving of the Journal, which should be protecting the clarity of scientific discourse.

Conflict of Interest:

None declared