Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

The death of p<0.05 and statistical significance?

Discussion in 'General Issues and Discussion Forum' started by Griff, Apr 5, 2014.

Tags:
  1. Griff

    Griff Moderator

  2. Good stuff! The 5% rule is arbitrary...why are we so stuck on it?
     
  3. Rob Kidd

    Rob Kidd Well-Known Member

    The answer is that you are not stuck with it - but even today people seem to forget that it has no basis in biology. It is simply a matter of what you can live with inside the hypotheses that you are testing. But then, you knew that.....................
     
  4. Ian Reilly

    Ian Reilly Active Member

    :santa2:

    Damn it... i can't count to 21 without taking my clothes off so how am i supposed to keep in touch with the literature now. Thankfully, I'm a pod surgeon so i just cut and don't have to worry about EBM! LOL


    (...joking...)

    Ian
     
  5. Tuckersm

    Tuckersm Well-Known Member

    P<0.05 is equivalent tossing 5 heads in a row. And if you saw someone do that straight up, you would start thinking something might be up here. (but you should also expect a run of 7 heads or tails if tossing 100 times). So all p<0.05 shows is their might be a correlation here.
     
  6. horseman

    horseman Active Member

    I wonder if the date the artical was posted correlates with the traction on my leg?
     
  7. Griff

    Griff Moderator

  8. Griff

    Griff Moderator

    And more reading. This from Nature:

    Statistical Errors

    Nice diagram within the piece too.
     

    Attached Files:

  9. Griff

    Griff Moderator

    While you're in, a wee bit of statistics banter:
     

    Attached Files:

  10. A better one.....

    When she told me I was average, she was just being mean.
     
  11. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Articles:
    8
    Did you hear the one about the statistician that drowned in a river with a mean depth of only 0.9m
     
  12. Rob Kidd

    Rob Kidd Well-Known Member

    As a part of Derbyshire cave rescue, in one of my many previous lives, I have dragged dead cavers out of less then 20cm of water...........................................
     
  13. Griff

    Griff Moderator

  14. Griff

    Griff Moderator

  15. Ian Linane

    Ian Linane Well-Known Member

    Love this from the the above psychology ref:

    "This is also often described as torturing the data until it confesses."
     
  16. Griff

    Griff Moderator

    Nice infographic from Yann Le Meur here:
     

    Attached Files:

  17. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Articles:
    1
    Statistical tests, P values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations
    Sander Greenland, Stephen J. Senn, Kenneth J. Rothman, John B. Carlin, Charles Poole, Steven N. Goodman, Douglas G. Altman
    European Journal of Epidemiology; April 2016, Volume 31, Issue 4, pp 337?350
     
Loading...

Share This Page