Skip to main content

Figures: Data Graphs

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
How to Write Better Medical Papers
  • 2209 Accesses

Abstract

Although figures are a crucial component of medical papers, most medical papers have rather low-quality graphs. They present substantially less information than they could. The information they do present is usually shown in a suboptimal or inappropriate form. And then visually the graphs are often cluttered with many other useless and distracting marks. Probably many researchers do not give much thought to the visual presentation of their data, since training in data visualization and graphic design is very rare in the medical scientific world. So this chapter starts by identifying some types of low-quality graphs that are often seen in medical papers and explains why and how to replace them. Next, this chapter will present some other types of higher quality graphs that could be used often but currently are rarely seen. Finally, this chapter discusses some graphic editing steps that can be used to improve any graph you make. By putting some thought and clarity into your graphs, you will greatly increase the interest and comprehension of journal editors, peer-reviewers, and readers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Tufte ER. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, 2nd ed. Cheshire, CT, USA: Graphics Press; 1983, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gillan DJ, Wickens CD, Hollands JG, Carswell CM. Guidelines for Presenting Quantitative Data in HFES Publications. Hum Factors. 1998; 40: 28-41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Tufte ER. Envisioning Information. Cheshire, CT, USA: Graphics Press; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cleveland WS. The Elements of Graphing Data. Murray Hill, NJ, USA: AT&T Bell Laboratories; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hollands JG, Spence I. Judgments of Change and Proportion in Graphical Perception. Hum Factors. 1992; 34: 313-334.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Schriger DL, Cooper RJ. Achieving Graphical Excellence: Suggestions and Methods for Creating High-Quality Visual Displays of Experimental Data. Ann Emerg Med. 2001; 37: 75-87.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Tobias A. Dynamite plunger plots should not be used. Occup Environ Med. 1998; 55: 361-362.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Lane DM, Sándor A. Designing Better Graphs by Including Distributional Information and Integrating Words, Numbers, and Images. Psychol Methods. 2009; 14: 239-257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kick the bar chart habit. Nat Methods. 2014; 11: 113.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Streit M, Gehlenborg N. Bar charts and box plots. Nat Methods. 2014; 11: 117.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Krzywinski M, Altman N. Visualizing samples with box plots. Nat Methods. 2014; 11: 119-120.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Larson MG. Descriptive Statistics and Graphical Displays. Circulation. 2006; 114: 76-81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rockman HA. Great expectations. J Clin Invest. 2012; 122: 1133.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Weissgerber TL, Milic NM, Winham SJ, Garovic VD. Beyond Bar and Line Graphs: Time for a New Data Presentation Paradigm. PLoS Biol. 2015; 13: e1002128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bland M. An Introduction to Medical Statistics, 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Altman DG. Practical Statistics for Medical Research. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press; 1991, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Bullimore MA. Love the Data, Hate the Figures. Optom Vis Sci. 2004; 81: 642-643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Schriger DL, Sinha R, Schroter S, Liu PY, Altman DG. From Submission to Publication: A Retrospective Review of the Tables and Figures in a Cohort of Randomized Controlled Trials Submitted to the British Medical Journal. Ann Emerg Med. 2006; 48: 750-756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hayes SN, Redberg RF. Dispelling the Myths: Calling for Sex-Specific Reporting of Trial Results. Mayo Clin Proc. 2008; 83: 523-525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Wainer H. Depicting Error. Am Stat. 1996; 50: 101-111.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Briscoe MH. Preparing Scientific Illustrations, 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 1996.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  22. Pocock SJ, Travison TG, Wruck LM. Figures in clinical trial reports: current practice & scope for improvement. Trials. 2007; 8: 36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. McDonald JC. Charts, Graphs and Tables – Reporting the Data. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2001; 95: 291-293.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Durbin CG Jr. Effective Use of Tables and Figures in Abstracts, Presentations, and Papers. Respir Care. 2004; 49: 1233-1237.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hanna, M. (2019). Figures: Data Graphs. In: How to Write Better Medical Papers. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02955-5_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02955-5_18

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-02954-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-02955-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics