ArticleShanghai archives of psychiatry2015
The debate about p-values.
Article in Shanghai archives of psychiatry, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of The Umbrella Collaboration for Tertiary Evidence Synthesis in Geriatrics: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Mu opioid receptors expressed in striatal D2 medium spiny neurons have divergent contributions to cocaine and morphine reward.Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Prefrontal electrophysiological biomarkers and mechanism-based drug effects in a rat model of alcohol addiction.Translational psychiatry · 2024Article
- Multiplicity Eludes Peer Review: The Case of COVID-19 Research.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Observational
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The p-value is the most widely used statistical concept in biomedical research. Recently, there are controversies over its utility and over the possible relationship between p-value misuse and the relatively high proportion of published medical research that cannot be replicated. In this paper, we introduce the p-value in layman's terms and explain its randomness and limitations. However, we also point out that the available alternatives to p-value suffer similar limitations. We conclude that using p values is a valid way to test the null and alternative hypotheses in clinical trials. However, using the p-value from a single statistical test to judge the scientific merit of a research project is a misuse of the p-value; the results of inference tests using p-values need to be integrated with secondary results and other data to arrive at clinically valid conclusions. Understanding the variability and limitations of the p-value is important for the interpretation of statistical results in research studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.