Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35647369›Full record

ArticleJournal of preventive medicine and hygiene2022

The role of statistical significance testing in public law and health risk assessment.

Tommaso Filippini, Silvio Roberto Vinceti

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tommaso FilippiniEnvironmental, Genetic and Nutritional Epidemiology Research Center (CREAGEN), Section of Public Health, Department of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
Silvio Roberto VincetiDepartment of Law, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
University of Modena and Reggio Emilia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Following a fundamental statement made in 2016 by the American Statistical Associations and broad and consistent changes in data analysis and interpretation methodology in public health and other sciences, statistical significance/null hypothesis testing is being increasingly criticized and abandoned in the reporting and interpretation of the results of biomedical research. This shift in favor of a more comprehensive and non-dichotomous approach in the assessment of causal relationships may have a major impact on human health risk assessment. It is interesting to see, however, that authoritative opinions by the Supreme Court of the United States and European regulatory agencies have somehow anticipated this tide of criticism of statistical significance testing, thus providing additional support to its demise. Current methodological evidence further warrants abandoning this approach in both the biomedical and public law contexts, in favor of a more comprehensive and flexible method of assessing the effects of toxicological exposure on human and environmental health.

Indexed as

Public HealthResearch DesignHumansRisk AssessmentUnited StatesHealth risk assessmentNull hypothesis testingPublic lawStatistical significance

Identifiers

PMID35647369
PMCPMC9121665
OpenAlexW4282939918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.