Invited commentary: Evidence-based evaluation of p values and bayes factors

American Journal of Epidemiology

Volumn 168, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 384-388

  Katki, Hormuzd A ^a  

^a NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Bayes theorem; Empirical research; Epidemiologic methods; Meta analysis; Observation; Statistics

Indexed keywords

BAYES THEOREM; EVALUATION; FOLLOW UP; NOTE; NULL HYPOTHESIS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;

EID: 49449107857     PISSN: 00029262     EISSN: 14766256     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwn148     Document Type: Note

References (20)

1. Jaynes ET. Probability theory: the logic of science. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
2. Jeffreys H. Theory of probability. 3rd ed. Oxford, United Kingdom: Clarendon Press, 1961.
3. Weinberg CR. It's time to rehabilitate the P value. Epidemiology 2001;12:288-90.
4. Fisher RA. Statistical methods and scientific inference. Edinburgh, United Kingdom: Oliver and Boyd, 1956:42.
5. Royall RM. Statistical evidence: a likelihood paradigm. London, United Kingdom: Chapman and Hall Ltd, 1997.
6. Goodman SN. Introduction to Bayesian methods I: measuring the strength of evidence. Clin Trials 2005;2:282-90.
7. Ioannidis JPA. Effect of formal statistical significance on the credibility of observational associations. Am J Epidemiol 2008;168:374-83.
8. Alderson NE, Campbell G, D'Agostino R, et al. Statistical issues: a roundtable discussion. Clin Trials 2005;2:364-72.
9. Friedman M. Do old fallacies ever die? J Econ Lit 1992;30:2129-32.
10. Yu K, Chatterjee N, Wheeler W, et al. Flexible design for following up positive findings. Am J Hum Genet 2007;81:540-51.
11. Edwards W, Lindman H, Savage LJ. Bayesian statistical inference for psychological research. Psychol Rev 1963;70:193-242.
12. Wacholder S, Chanock S, Garcia-Closas M, et al. Assessing the probability that a positive report is false: an approach for molecular epidemiology studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:434-42.
13. Wakefield J. A Bayesian measure of the probability of false discovery in genetic epidemiology studies. Am J Hum Genet 2007;81:208-27.
14. Katki HA. Addressing a controversy about the meaning of p values by using false discovery rates. In: 2007 Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, Section on Bayesian Statistical Science. (CD-ROM). Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association, 2007:1199-205.
15. Ioannidis JPA. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med 2005;2:e124. (Electronic article).
16. Goodman S, Greenland S. Assessing the unreliability of the medical literature: a response to "Why most published research findings are false." Baltimore, MD: Department of Biostatistics, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, 2007. (Department of Biostatistics Working Paper 135). (http://www.bepress.com/jhubiostat/paper135).
17. Lindley D. A statistical paradox. Biometrika 1957;44:187-92.
18. Katki HA. Addressing a controversy about the meaning of p values by using false discovery rates. Presented at the Joint Statistical Meetings, Salt Lake City, Utah, July 29-August 2, 2007.
19. Goodman SN. Of P values and Bayes: a modest proposal. Epidemiology 2001;12:295-7.
20. Sellke T, Bayarri MJ, Berger JO. Calibration of p values for testing precise null hypotheses. Am Stat 2001;55:62-71.