Some common misperceptions about P values

Stroke

Volumn 45, Issue 12, 2014, Pages e244-e246

  Palesch, Yuko Y ^a  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Statistical data interpretation

Indexed keywords

TISSUE PLASMINOGEN ACTIVATOR;

HUMAN; HYPOTHESIS; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NONHUMAN; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; NOTE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; METHODOLOGY; STANDARDS; STATISTICS;

RESEARCH DESIGN; STATISTICS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84922480282     PISSN: 00392499     EISSN: 15244628     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.006138     Document Type: Note

References (5)

1. Cowles M, Davis C. On the origins of the 0.05 level of statistical significance. Am Psychol. 1982;37:553-558.
2. Kelly M. Emily Dickinson and monkeys on the stair or what is the significance of 5% significance level. Significance. 2013;10:21-22.
3. Broderick JP, Palesch YY, Demchuk AM, Yeatts SD, Khatri P, Hill MD, et al; Interventional Management of Stroke (IMS) III Investigators. Endovascular therapy after intravenous t-PA versus t-PA alone for stroke. N Engl J Med. 2013;368:893-903.
4. Pocock SJ, Assmann SE, Enos LE, Kasten LE. Subgroup analysis, covariate adjustment and baseline comparisons in clinical trial reporting: current practice and problems. Stat Med. 2002;21:2917-2930.
5. Senn S. Seven myths of randomisation in clinical trials. Stat Med. 2013;32:1439-1450.