Statistical Significance

Wikis > Research > Statistics > Statistical Significance

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2676503?utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=content-shareicons&utm_content=article_engagement&utm_medium=social&utm_term=032418&utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=social&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=#.WrbdhkpfTuI.twitter
http://theconversation.com/the-problem-with-p-values-how-significant-are-they-really-20029
http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2016/11/24/bjsports-2016-097072.short

P-Hacking and Other Statistical Sins


http://www.podiatry-arena.com/podiatry-forum/showthread.php?t=96641
http://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g2215

0.05 or 0.005? P-value Wars Continue


http://www.nature.com/news/big-names-in-statistics-want-to-shake-up-much-maligned-p-value-1.22375?WT.mc_id=TWT_NatureNews&sf101140733=1

P Value Under Fire


http://www.students4bestevidence.net/p-value-in-plain-english-2/
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-03/sumc-mp031016.php

Not Even Scientists Can Easily Explain P-values


http://www.nature.com/news/statistics-p-values-are-just-the-tip-of-the-iceberg-1.17412

P value ban: small step for a journal, giant leap for science


http://www.nature.com/news/scientific-method-statistical-errors-1.14700

We’re using a common statistical test all wrong. Statisticians want to fix that.


http://www2.hull.ac.uk/science/pdf/Statistics%20in%20Sport%20and%20Exercise%20Science%20Research.pdf
http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/1/3/140216
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/absolutely-maybe/2013/11/11/statistical-significance-and-its-part-in-science-downfalls/

Beware The P-Value


http://www.nature.com/news/weak-statistical-standards-implicated-in-scientific-irreproducibility-1.14131
http://www.nature.com/news/scientific-method-statistical-errors-1.14700
http://simplystatistics.org/2014/02/14/on-the-scalability-of-statistical-procedures-why-the-p-value-bashers-just-dont-get-it/

Psychology Journal Bans Significance Testing


Clinical and Statistical Significance

Statistically significant finding is a conclusion that there is evidence against the null hypothesis.

A ‘significant’ finding means that the difference was probably caused by something other than chance

A small difference between two large groups can be statistically significant but have little clinical meaning.
A large difference between two small groups can be clinically significant but not statistically significant.

When considering the significance reported in a study, consider:
• how likely is the significant difference due to chance (a type 1 error)
• if it was not due to chance, how likely was it due to flaws or biases in the study
• how likely was a type 2 error if the difference was not statistically significant
• if the differences are statistically different, are they also clinically significant

Sub Topics:

 
Comments are closed.