ReviewRevista peruana de medicina experimental y salud publica2025
The null hypothesis significance test and the dichotomization of the p-value: Errare Humanum Est.
Review in Revista peruana de medicina experimental y salud publica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Residential greenness and depressive symptoms in the Mexican adult population: A cross-sectional study.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Article
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Decision-making in healthcare is complex and needs to be based on the best scientific evidence. In this process, information derived from statistical analysis of data is crucial, which can be developed from either frequentist or Bayesian perspectives. When it comes to the frequentist field, the null hypothesis significance test (NHST) and its p-value is one of the most widely used techniques in different disciplines. However, NHST has been subjected to questioning from different academic points of view, which has led to it being considered as one of the causes of the so-called replicability crisis in science. In this review article, we provide a brief historical account of its development, summarize the underlying methods, describe some controversies and limitations, address misuse and misinterpretation, and finally give some scopes and reflections in the context of biomedical research.
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.