Literature DB >> 31922284

Wrangling with p-values versus effect sizes to improve medical decision-making: A tutorial.

Helena C Kraemer1, Eric Neri1, David Spiegel1.   

Abstract

The most pervasive and damaging myth in clinical research is that the smaller the p-value, the stronger the hypothesis. In reality, the p-value primarily reflects the quality of research design decisions. The most common proposal to avoid misleading conclusions from clinical research requires the appropriate use of effect sizes, but which effect size, used when and how, is an open question. A solution is proposed for perhaps the most common problem in clinical research, the comparison between two populations, for example, comparison of two treatments in a randomized clinical trial or comparison of high risk versus low risk individuals in an epidemiological study: the success rate difference or equivalently the number needed to treat/take (NNT).
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Keywords:  zzm321990p-values; NNT; ROC curves; SRD; effect sizes

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31922284     DOI: 10.1002/eat.23216

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Eat Disord        ISSN: 0276-3478            Impact factor:   4.861


  6 in total

1.  The efficacy of psychotherapies and pharmacotherapies for mental disorders in adults: an umbrella review and meta-analytic evaluation of recent meta-analyses.

Authors:  Falk Leichsenring; Christiane Steinert; Sven Rabung; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  World Psychiatry       Date:  2022-02       Impact factor: 49.548

2.  Conducting eating disorders research in the time of COVID-19: A survey of researchers in the field.

Authors:  Ruth Striegel Weissman; Kelly L Klump; Jennifer Rose
Journal:  Int J Eat Disord       Date:  2020-05-25       Impact factor: 4.861

3.  Influence of the statistical significance of results and spin on readers' interpretation of the results in an abstract for a hypothetical clinical trial: a randomised trial.

Authors:  Sofyan Jankowski; Isabelle Boutron; Mike Clarke
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-04-08       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire: Evaluating factor structures and establishing measurement invariance with Asian/Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Black, and White American college men.

Authors:  Neha J Goel; Carolyn Blair Burnette; Madison Weinstock; Suzanne E Mazzeo
Journal:  Int J Eat Disord       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 5.791

5.  The COVID-19 pandemic and youth with anorexia nervosa: A retrospective comparative cohort design.

Authors:  Nandini Datta; Eliza Van Wye; Kyra Citron; Brittany Matheson; James D Lock
Journal:  Int J Eat Disord       Date:  2022-09-20       Impact factor: 5.791

6.  Eating disorders in times of the COVID-19 pandemic-Results from an online survey of patients with anorexia nervosa.

Authors:  Sandra Schlegl; Julia Maier; Adrian Meule; Ulrich Voderholzer
Journal:  Int J Eat Disord       Date:  2020-08-25       Impact factor: 5.791

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.