Cover Image
QR Code

Clinical and practical importance vs statistical significance: Limitations of conventional statistical inference.

Background: Decisions about support for therapies are often made using statistical inference in light of data. The dominant approach is null hypothesis significance testing (NHST). Applied correctly, NHST provides a procedure for making dichotomous decisions about zero-effect null hypotheses with kn...

Full description

Published in:International Journal of Therapy & Rehabilitation Vol. 21; no. 10; pp. 488 - 496
Main Authors: Wilkinson, Michael, Winter, Edward M.
Format: equations & formulas Journal Article
Published: Mark Allen Holdings Limited Oct2014
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=99473778&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 99473778
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        17411645
        QTM
      jtl: International Journal of Therapy & Rehabilitation
      issn: 17411645
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Oct2014
      vid: 21
      iid: 10
      pid: 11383
      pub: Mark Allen Holdings Limited
    artinfo:
      ui:
        99473778
        103917351
        103917351
        10.12968/ijtr.2014.21.10.488
        99473778
      ppf: 488
      ppct: 8
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
      tig:
        atl: Clinical and practical importance vs statistical significance: Limitations of conventional statistical inference.
      aug:
        au:
          Wilkinson, Michael
          Winter, Edward M.
        affil: Senior lecturer, Department of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Northumbria University, UK
      sug:
        subj:
          Statistics
          Physical Therapy Utilization
          Null Hypothesis
          Power Analysis
          Effect Size
          Probability
      ab: Background: Decisions about support for therapies are often made using statistical inference in light of data. The dominant approach is null hypothesis significance testing (NHST). Applied correctly, NHST provides a procedure for making dichotomous decisions about zero-effect null hypotheses with known and controlled error rates. Type I and Type II error rates must be specified in advance, and the latter controlled by a priori sample size calculation. However, NHST does not provide the probability of hypotheses or the strength of support for hypotheses in light of data. The outcomes allow conclusions about the existence of non-zero effects, but provide no information about the likely size of true effects or their practical or clinical value. Content: Magnitude-based inference allows researchers to estimate the 'true' or large sample magnitude of effects with a specified likelihood, and how likely they are to exceed an effect magnitude of practical or clinical importance. This approach integrates the elements of subjective judgement that are central to clinical practice into a formal analysis of data, which facilitates more considered and enlightened interpretations of data, and avoids rejection of possibly highly beneficial therapies that are not statistically significant. Conclusions: Magnitude-based inference is gaining acceptance, but progress will be hastened if the shortcomings of NHST are understood.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        equations & formulas
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N