Low P-values exclude nothing, and P-values are no substitute for measures of effect

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 64, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 452-453

  Stang, Andreas ^a  

^a MARTIN LUTHER UNIVERSITY HALLE WITTENBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOSTATISTICS; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); EFFECT SIZE; HUMAN; LETTER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 79951946281     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.11.003     Document Type: Letter

References (3)

1. Müeller D, Sauerland S, Neugebauer EA, Immenroth M. Reported effects in randomized controlled trials were compared with those of nonrandomized trials in cholecystectomy. J Clin Epidemiol 2010; 63:1082-90.
2. Stang A, Poole C, Kuss O. The ongoing tyranny of statistical significance testing in biomedical research. Eur J Epidemiol 2010;25:225-30.
3. Lang JM, Rothman KJ, Cann CI. That confounded P-value. Epidemiology 1998;9:7-8.