TY - JOUR
T1 - Current controversies
T2 - Null hypothesis significance testing
AU - Sedgwick, Philip M.
AU - Hammer, Anne
AU - Kesmodel, Ulrik Schiøler
AU - Pedersen, Lars Henning
N1 - © 2022 The Authors. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology (NFOG).
PY - 2022/6
Y1 - 2022/6
N2 - Traditional null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) incorporating the critical level of significance of 0.05 has become the cornerstone of decision-making in health care, and nowhere less so than in obstetric and gynecological research. However, such practice is controversial. In particular, it was never intended for clinical significance to be inferred from statistical significance. The inference of clinical importance based on statistical significance (p < 0.05), and lack of clinical significance otherwise (p ≥ 0.05) represents misunderstanding of the original purpose of NHST. Furthermore, the limitations of NHST-sensitivity to sample size, plus type I and II errors-are frequently ignored. Therefore, decision-making based on NHST has the potential for recurrent false claims about the effectiveness of interventions or importance of exposure to risk factors, or dismissal of important ones. This commentary presents the history behind NHST along with the limitations that modern-day NHST presents, and suggests that a statistics reform regarding NHST be considered.
AB - Traditional null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) incorporating the critical level of significance of 0.05 has become the cornerstone of decision-making in health care, and nowhere less so than in obstetric and gynecological research. However, such practice is controversial. In particular, it was never intended for clinical significance to be inferred from statistical significance. The inference of clinical importance based on statistical significance (p < 0.05), and lack of clinical significance otherwise (p ≥ 0.05) represents misunderstanding of the original purpose of NHST. Furthermore, the limitations of NHST-sensitivity to sample size, plus type I and II errors-are frequently ignored. Therefore, decision-making based on NHST has the potential for recurrent false claims about the effectiveness of interventions or importance of exposure to risk factors, or dismissal of important ones. This commentary presents the history behind NHST along with the limitations that modern-day NHST presents, and suggests that a statistics reform regarding NHST be considered.
KW - clinical significance
KW - null hypothesis significance testing
KW - p < 0.05
KW - statistical significance
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85128570455&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/aogs.14366
DO - 10.1111/aogs.14366
M3 - Comment/debate
C2 - 35451497
SN - 0001-6349
VL - 101
SP - 624
EP - 627
JO - Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
JF - Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
IS - 6
ER -