ArticleRevista Brasileira de terapia intensiva
Is the p-value properly interpreted by critical care professionals? Online survey.
Article in Revista Brasileira de terapia intensiva. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surveys in clinical research: methodological aspects and practical guidance.Critical care science · 2026Review
- Family medicine residents' knowledge and attitudes towards biostatistics, Taif, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2022Article
- Interpreting Results from Statistical Hypothesis Testing: Understanding the Appropriate P-value.Physical therapy research · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the prevalence of and risk factors for insufficient knowledge related to p-values among critical care physicians and respiratory therapists in Argentina.
methodsThis cross-sectional online survey contained 25 questions about respondents' characteristics, self-perception and p-value knowledge (theory and practice). Descriptive and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted.
resultsThree hundred seventy-six respondents were analyzed. Two hundred thirty-seven respondents (63.1%) did not know about p-values. According to the multivariable logistic regression analysis, a lack of training on scientific research methodology (adjusted OR 2.50; 95%CI 1.37 - 4.53; p = 0.003) and the amount of reading (< 6 scientific articles per year; adjusted OR 3.27; 95%CI 1.67 - 6.40; p = 0.001) were found to be independently associated with the respondents' lack of p-value knowledge.
conclusionThe prevalence of insufficient knowledge regarding p-values among critical care physicians and respiratory therapists in Argentina was 63%. A lack of training on scientific research methodology and the amount of reading (< 6 scientific articles per year) were found to be independently associated with the respondents' lack of p-value knowledge.
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.