P-values and significance: The null hypothesis that they are not related is correct.

Clicks: 163
ID: 28892
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #21 of 25 articles by views in journal of critical care

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
False signals and therapeutic optimism have led medicine down many a wrong pathway. Apart from the unnecessary costs of care and redundant research expenditure and efforts this has caused, therapies which were eventually discontinued may have come at a staggering cost of lives lost. Still most statistical information in the medical literature is presented with its p-values and little else. The use of p<0.05 was proposed as an arbitrary threshold for defining a statistically significant difference. Strong signals manifest even with the use of small sample sizes and are highly replicable. However, weak signals, which are increasingly the focus of modern research, may be obscured by the presence of other powerful variables in the dataset are more likely to decay in subsequent studies due to multiple causes. It is time to set higher standards for evidence in medical research. Data that should always be presented in conjunction with the p-value are the Confidence Intervals, which illustrate the uncertainty inherent to the results, and the Fragility Index, which reflects result robustness. Multiple RCTs should be the standard for implementing change. Ideally these studies should consistently demonstrate p-values <0.005, study and control groups with well separated 95% CIs and high fragility indices.
Reference Key
einav2019pvaluesjournal Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Einav, Sharon;O'Connor, Michael;
Journal journal of critical care
Year 2019
DOI
S0883-9441(19)30381-8
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.