FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2961427706> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2961427706 endingPage "2363" @default.
• W2961427706 startingPage "2358" @default.
• W2961427706 abstract "Background Clinical research in orthopaedics typically reports the presence of an association after rejecting a null hypothesis of no association using an alpha threshold of 0.05 at which to evaluate a calculated p value. This arbitrary value is a factor that results in the current difficulties reproducing research findings. A proposal is gaining attention to lower the alpha threshold to 0.005. However, it is currently unknown how alpha thresholds are used in orthopaedics and the distribution of p values reported. Questions/purposes We sought to describe the use of alpha thresholds in two orthopaedic journals by asking (1) How frequently are alpha threshold values reported? (2) How frequently are power calculations reported? (3) How frequently are p values between 0.005 and 0.05 reported for the main hypothesis? (4) Are p values less than 0.005 associated with study characteristics such as design and reporting power calculations? Methods The 100 most recent original clinical research articles from two leading orthopaedic journals at the time of this proposal were reviewed. For studies without a specified primary hypothesis, a main hypothesis was selected that was most consistent with the title and abstract. The p value for the main hypothesis and lowest p value for each study were recorded. Study characteristics including details of alpha thresholds, beta, and p values were recorded. Associations between study characteristics and p values were described. Of the 200 articles (100 from each journal), 23 were randomized controlled trials, 141 were cohort studies or case series (defined as a study in which authors had access to original data collected for the study purpose), 31 were database studies, and five were classified as other. Results An alpha threshold was reported in 166 articles (83%) with all but two reporting a value 0.05. Forty-two articles (21%) reported performing a power calculation. The p value for the main hypothesis was less than 0.005 for 88 articles (44%), between 0.05 and 0.005 for 67 (34%), and greater than 0.05 for 29 (15%). The smallest p value was between 0.05 and 0.005 for 39 articles (20%), less than 0.005 for 143 (72%), and either not provided or greater than 0.05 for 18 (9%). Although 50% (65 of 130) cohort and database papers had a main hypothesis p value less than 0.005, only 26% (6 of 23) randomized controlled trials did. Only 36% (15 of 42) articles reporting a power calculation had a p value less than 0.005 compared with 51% (73 of 142) that did not report one. Conclusions Although a lower alpha threshold may theoretically increase the reproducibility of research findings across orthopaedics, this would preferentially select findings from lower-quality studies or increase the burden on higher quality ones. A more-nuanced approach could be to consider alpha thresholds specific to study characteristics. For example, randomized controlled trials with a prespecified primary hypothesis may still be best evaluated at 0.05 while database studies with an abundance of statistical tests may be best evaluated at a threshold even below 0.005. Clinical Relevance Surgeons and scientists in orthopaedics should understand that the default alpha threshold of 0.05 represents an arbitrary value that could be lowered to help reduce type-I errors; however, it must also be appreciated that such a change could increase type-II errors, increase resource utilization, and preferentially select findings from lower-quality studies." @default.
• W2961427706 created "2019-07-23" @default.
• W2961427706 creator A5028785271 @default.
• W2961427706 creator A5072428776 @default.
• W2961427706 creator A5073168725 @default.
• W2961427706 date "2019-06-17" @default.
• W2961427706 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W2961427706 title "What Are the Implications of Alternative Alpha Thresholds for Hypothesis Testing in Orthopaedics?" @default.
• W2961427706 cites W1493454484 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W1965149248 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W1966829534 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W1971289666 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W1976365965 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W1984486655 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2022936635 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2046391772 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2054508795 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2095030716 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2130998313 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2132156361 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2144981148 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2315623368 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2418843447 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2558228245 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2581784150 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2736848882 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2757224716 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2793642340 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2883633904 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2891386547 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W2899551940 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W4235934385 @default.
• W2961427706 cites W4239326724 @default.
• W2961427706 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/corr.0000000000000843" @default.
• W2961427706 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/6999932" @default.
• W2961427706 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31283730" @default.
• W2961427706 hasPublicationYear "2019" @default.
• W2961427706 type Work @default.
• W2961427706 sameAs 2961427706 @default.
• W2961427706 citedByCount "5" @default.
• W2961427706 countsByYear W29614277062019 @default.
• W2961427706 countsByYear W29614277062021 @default.
• W2961427706 countsByYear W29614277062022 @default.
• W2961427706 countsByYear W29614277062023 @default.
• W2961427706 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2961427706 hasAuthorship W2961427706A5028785271 @default.
• W2961427706 hasAuthorship W2961427706A5072428776 @default.
• W2961427706 hasAuthorship W2961427706A5073168725 @default.
• W2961427706 hasBestOaLocation W29614277061 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConcept C191988596 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConcept C2776291640 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConcept C44036329 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConcept C68312169 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConcept C87007009 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConceptScore W2961427706C105795698 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConceptScore W2961427706C141071460 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConceptScore W2961427706C191988596 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConceptScore W2961427706C2776291640 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConceptScore W2961427706C33923547 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConceptScore W2961427706C44036329 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConceptScore W2961427706C68312169 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConceptScore W2961427706C71924100 @default.
• W2961427706 hasConceptScore W2961427706C87007009 @default.
• W2961427706 hasIssue "10" @default.
• W2961427706 hasLocation W29614277061 @default.
• W2961427706 hasLocation W29614277062 @default.
• W2961427706 hasLocation W29614277063 @default.
• W2961427706 hasLocation W29614277064 @default.
• W2961427706 hasOpenAccess W2961427706 @default.
• W2961427706 hasPrimaryLocation W29614277061 @default.
• W2961427706 hasRelatedWork W1970221037 @default.
• W2961427706 hasRelatedWork W1978135938 @default.
• W2961427706 hasRelatedWork W1991843868 @default.
• W2961427706 hasRelatedWork W2035871637 @default.
• W2961427706 hasRelatedWork W2206289822 @default.
• W2961427706 hasRelatedWork W2511974089 @default.
• W2961427706 hasRelatedWork W2897830442 @default.
• W2961427706 hasRelatedWork W2898816940 @default.
• W2961427706 hasRelatedWork W2998601844 @default.
• W2961427706 hasRelatedWork W2582606752 @default.
• W2961427706 hasVolume "477" @default.
• W2961427706 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2961427706 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2961427706 magId "2961427706" @default.
• W2961427706 workType "article" @default.