Literature DB >> 24218581

Revised standards for statistical evidence.

Valen E Johnson1.   

Abstract

Recent advances in Bayesian hypothesis testing have led to the development of uniformly most powerful Bayesian tests, which represent an objective, default class of Bayesian hypothesis tests that have the same rejection regions as classical significance tests. Based on the correspondence between these two classes of tests, it is possible to equate the size of classical hypothesis tests with evidence thresholds in Bayesian tests, and to equate P values with Bayes factors. An examination of these connections suggest that recent concerns over the lack of reproducibility of scientific studies can be attributed largely to the conduct of significance tests at unjustifiably high levels of significance. To correct this problem, evidence thresholds required for the declaration of a significant finding should be increased to 25-50:1, and to 100-200:1 for the declaration of a highly significant finding. In terms of classical hypothesis tests, these evidence standards mandate the conduct of tests at the 0.005 or 0.001 level of significance.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24218581      PMCID: PMC3845140          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1313476110

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  12 in total

1.  Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis.

Authors:  S Duval; R Tweedie
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Contradicted and initially stronger effects in highly cited clinical research.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-07-13       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p values.

Authors:  Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2007-10

4.  An exploratory test for an excess of significant findings.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis; Thomas A Trikalinos
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.486

5.  Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis.

Authors:  Jeffrey N Rouder; Paul L Speckman; Dongchu Sun; Richard D Morey; Geoffrey Iverson
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2009-04

6.  Evidence that publication bias contaminated studies relating social class and unethical behavior.

Authors:  Gregory Francis
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-05-21       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  P-curve: a key to the file-drawer.

Authors:  Uri Simonsohn; Leif D Nelson; Joseph P Simmons
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2013-07-15

8.  UNIFORMLY MOST POWERFUL BAYESIAN TESTS.

Authors:  Valen E Johnson
Journal:  Ann Stat       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 4.028

9.  What is the probability of replicating a statistically significant effect?

Authors:  Jeff Miller
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2009-08

10.  Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias.

Authors:  C B Begg; M Mazumdar
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 2.571

View more
  134 in total

Review 1.  Improving the analysis of routine outcome measurement data: what a Bayesian approach can do for you.

Authors:  Rivka M de Vries; Rob R Meijer; Vincent van Bruggen; Richard D Morey
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2015-10-08       Impact factor: 4.035

2.  Voxel Level Survival Analysis of Grey Matter Volume and Incident Mild Cognitive Impairment or Alzheimer's Disease.

Authors:  Lubov E Zeifman; William F Eddy; Oscar L Lopez; Lewis H Kuller; Cyrus Raji; Paul M Thompson; James T Becker
Journal:  J Alzheimers Dis       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 4.472

3.  Robustness of statistical methods when measure is affected by ceiling and/or floor effect.

Authors:  Matúš Šimkovic; Birgit Träuble
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-08-19       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Ketamine's effectiveness in unipolar versus bipolar depression.

Authors:  Guillaume Fond; Laurent Boyer
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2014-10-15       Impact factor: 4.530

5.  Revised evidence for statistical standards.

Authors:  Andrew Gelman; Christian P Robert
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-04-23       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Correlation Map, a goodness-of-fit test for one-dimensional X-ray scattering spectra.

Authors:  Daniel Franke; Cy M Jeffries; Dmitri I Svergun
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2015-04-06       Impact factor: 28.547

7.  The fickle P value generates irreproducible results.

Authors:  Lewis G Halsey; Douglas Curran-Everett; Sarah L Vowler; Gordon B Drummond
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 28.547

8.  Sequence-specific dynamic information in proteins.

Authors:  H A Scheraga; S Rackovsky
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2019-06-11

9.  Perspective: Limiting Dependence on Nonrandomized Studies and Improving Randomized Trials in Human Nutrition Research: Why and How.

Authors:  John F Trepanowski; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 8.701

10.  Three common misuses of P values.

Authors:  Jeehyoung Kim; Heejung Bang
Journal:  Dent Hypotheses       Date:  2016-09-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.