+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

The null hypothesis significance test in health sciences research (1995-2006): statistical analysis and interpretation

The null hypothesis significance test in health sciences research (1995-2006): statistical analysis and interpretation

Bmc Medical Research Methodology 10: 44

The null hypothesis significance test (NHST) is the most frequently used statistical method, although its inferential validity has been widely criticized since its introduction. In 1988, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) warned against sole reliance on NHST to substantiate study conclusions and suggested supplementary use of confidence intervals (CI). Our objective was to evaluate the extent and quality in the use of NHST and CI, both in English and Spanish language biomedical publications between 1995 and 2006, taking into account the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors recommendations, with particular focus on the accuracy of the interpretation of statistical significance and the validity of conclusions. Original articles published in three English and three Spanish biomedical journals in three fields (General Medicine, Clinical Specialties and Epidemiology - Public Health) were considered for this study. Papers published in 1995-1996, 2000-2001, and 2005-2006 were selected through a systematic sampling method. After excluding the purely descriptive and theoretical articles, analytic studies were evaluated for their use of NHST with P-values and/or CI for interpretation of statistical "significance" and "relevance" in study conclusions. Among 1,043 original papers, 874 were selected for detailed review. The exclusive use of P-values was less frequent in English language publications as well as in Public Health journals; overall such use decreased from 41% in 1995-1996 to 21% in 2005-2006. While the use of CI increased over time, the "significance fallacy" (to equate statistical and substantive significance) appeared very often, mainly in journals devoted to clinical specialties (81%). In papers originally written in English and Spanish, 15% and 10%, respectively, mentioned statistical significance in their conclusions. Overall, results of our review show some improvements in statistical management of statistical results, but further efforts by scholars and journal editors are clearly required to move the communication toward ICMJE advices, especially in the clinical setting, which seems to be imperative among publications in Spanish.

Please choose payment method:

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 056420552

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 20482841

DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-10-44

Related references

Can't miss: conquer any number task by making important statistics simple. Part 6. Tests of statistical significance (z test statistic, rejecting the null hypothesis, p value), t test, z test for proportions, statistical significance versus meaningful difference. Journal for Healthcare Quality 26(4): 43-53, 2004

Null hypothesis in studies on plant communities i. null model research procedure statistical analysis of results. Ekologia polska 36(3-4): 471-484, 1988

What role should null-hypothesis significance tests have in statistical education and hypothesis falsification?. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 22(9): 445-6; Author Reply 446, 2007

Choosing an appropriate statistical test of significance for a nursing research hypothesis or question. Western Journal of Nursing Research 3(4): 337-69 P, 1981

Perspectives on the Use of Null Hypothesis Statistical Testing. Part II: Is Null Hypothesis Statistical Testing an Irregular Bulk of Masonry?. Educational and Psychological Measurement 77(4): 613-615, 2017

In praise of the null hypothesis statistical test. American Psychologist 52(1): 15-24, 1997

In criticism of the null hypothesis statistical test. American Psychologist 53(7): 798-799, 1998

A shift from significance test to hypothesis test through power analysis in medical research. Journal of Postgraduate Medicine 52(2): 148-150, 2006

The fallacy of the null-hypothesis significance test. Psychological Bulletin 57: 416-428, 1960

A common misapplication of statistical inference: Nuisance control with null-hypothesis significance tests. Brain and Language 162: 42-45, 2016

Statistics notebook: Entry III.A: Statistical hypotheses, null vs. alternative; Entry III.B: Statistical vs. research hypothesis. Optometry and Vision Science 68(7): 565-568, 1991

Impact of criticism of null-hypothesis significance testing on statistical reporting practices in conservation biology. Conservation Biology 20(5): 1539-1544, 2006

Entry Iii.A: Statistical Hypotheses, Null vs. Alternative; Entry Iii.B; Statistical vs. Research Hypothesis. Optometry and Vision Science 68(7): 565-568, 1991

A test of the null hypothesis significance testing procedure correlation argument. Journal of General Psychology 136(3): 261-269, 2009

When Null Hypothesis Significance Testing Is Unsuitable for Research: A Reassessment. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 11: 390, 2017