Common misconceptions about data analysis and statistics

British Journal of Pharmacology

Volumn 172, Issue 8, 2015, Pages 2126-2132

  Motulsky, Harvey J ^a  

^a GraphPad Software Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

METHODOLOGY; PUBLICATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84925862312     PISSN: 00071188     EISSN: 14765381     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/bph.12884     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Anonymous (2013). Trouble at the lab. The Economist 409: 23-27, 2013.
2. Collins FS, Tabak LA, (2014). Policy: NIH plans to enhance reproducibility. Nature 505: 612-613.
3. Begley CG, Ellis LM, (2012). Raise standards for preclinical cancer research. Nature 483: 533.
4. Berry DA, (2007). The difficult and ubiquitous problems of multiplicities. Pharmaceutical Stat 6: 155-160.
5. Cohen J, (1994). The earth is round (p < 0.05). Amer. Psychologist 49: 997-1003.
6. Colquhoun D, (2014). An investigation of the false discovery rate and the misinterpretation of P values http://arxiv.org/abs/1407.5296.
7. FDA (2010). Guidance for Industry: Adaptive Design Clinical Trials for Drugs and Biologics. Accessed July 29, 2014 at http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM201790.pdf.
8. Hankins M, Still not significant. Psychologically Flawed April 21, 2013. Accessed July 28, 2013 at mchankins.wordpress.com/2013/04/21/still-not-significant-2/.
9. Ioannidis JPA, (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med 2: e124.
10. Kairalla JA, Coffey CS, Thomann MA, Muller KE, (2012). Adaptive trial designs: a review of barriers and opportunities. Trials 13: 145-145.
11. Kerr NL, (1998). HARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known. Personality and Social Psychology Review 2: 196-217.
12. Kriegeskorte N, Simmons WK, Bellgowan PSF, Baker CI, (2009). Circular analysis in systems neuroscience: The dangers of double dipping. Nature Neuroscience 12: 535-540.
13. Marino MJ, (2014). The use and misuse of statistical methodologies in pharmacology research. Biochem Pharmacol 87: 78-92.
14. rd edition, Oxford University Press.
15. Motulsky HJ, (2014b). Using simulations to calculate the false discovery rate. Accessed June 1, 2014 at http://www.graphpad.com/support/faqid/1923 /
16. Motulsky HJ, (2014c). Opinion: Never use the word 'significant' in a scientific paper. Adv Regenerative Biology 2014, 1: 25155. http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/arb.v1.25155 (in press)
17. Prinz F, Schlange T, Asadullah K, (2011). Believe it or not: how much can we rely on published data on potential drug targets? Nat Rev Drug Discovery 10: 712-713. DOI 10.1038/
18. Simmons J, Nelson L, Simonsohn U, (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allow presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science 22: 1359-1366.
19. Ziliak S, McCloskey DN, (2008). The cult of statistical significance: How the standard error costs us jobs, justice, and lives. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. ISBN= 0472050079.