Statistische Inferenz mittels Schätzung: Empfehlungen der International Society of Physiotherapy Journal Editors

 

 Permissions and Reprints

In der Gesundheitsforschung, einschließlich des Bereichs der Physiotherapie, werden häufig statistische Nullhypothesentests angewendet [1] [2]. Trotz ihres weit verbreiteten Einsatzes unterliegen statistische Nullhypothesentests jedoch bedeutenden Einschränkungen. Dieses gemeinschaftlich herausgegebene Editorial erklärt Inferenzstatistik unter Verwendung von statistischen Nullhypothesentests und die mit diesem Ansatz verbundenen Probleme. Es untersucht außerdem einen alternativen Ansatz für statistische Inferenz (der als Schätzen bezeichnet wird) und ermutigt Leser*innen physiotherapeutischer Forschung, sich mit Schätzmethoden und der Interpretation ihrer Ergebnisse vertraut zu machen. Darüber hinaus macht das Editorial Forschende darauf aufmerksam, dass einige Mitglieder der International Society of Physiotherapy Journal Editors (ISPJE) zukünftig Manuskripte erwarten, in denen Schätzmethoden anstelle statistischer Nullhypothesentests verwendet werden.[1]

Publication History

Article published online:
07 June 2022

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

• Literatur

• 1 Nickerson RS. Null hypothesis significance testing: a review of an old and continuing controversy. Psychol Methods 2000; 5: 241-301 DOI: 10.1037/1082-989x.5.2.241.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Freire APCF, Elkins MR, Ramos EM. et al. Use of 95% confidence intervals in the reporting of between-group differences in randomized controlled trials: analysis of a representative sample of 200 physical therapy trials. Braz J Phys Ther 2019; 23: 302-310 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2018.10.004.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Altman DG, Bland JM. Uncertainty and sampling error. BMJ 2014; 349: g7064 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.g7064.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Barnett V. Comparative Statistical Inference. London, New York: Wiley; 1973
  Google Scholar
• 5 Royall RM. Statistical Evidence: A Likelihood Paradigm. 1st ed.. London, New York: Chapman & Hall; 1997
  Google Scholar
• 6 Gigerenzer G. The Empire of Chance: How Probability Changed Science and Everyday Life. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press; 1989
  CrossrefGoogle Scholar
• 7 Goodman SN, Royall R. Evidence and scientific research. Am J Public Health 1988; 78: 1568-1574 DOI: 10.2105/ajph.78.12.1568.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Ziliak S, McCloskey D. The Cult of Statistical Significance: How the Standard Error Costs Us Jobs, Justice, and Lives. Ann Arbor, USA: University of Michigan Press; 2008
  Google Scholar
• 9 Hubbard R. Corrupt Research: The Case for Reconceptualizing Empirical Management and Social Science. Thousand Oaks, USA: Sage; 2016
  CrossrefGoogle Scholar
• 10 Herbert RD. How to estimate treatment effects from reports of clinical trials. I: Continuous outcomes. Aust J Physiother 2000; 46: 229-235 DOI: 10.1016/S0004-9514(14)60334-2.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Maher CG, Sherrington C, Elkins M. et al. Challenges for evidence-based physical therapy: accessing and interpreting high-quality evidence on therapy. Phys Ther 2004; 84: 644-654 DOI: 10.1093/ptj/84.7.644.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Yi D, Ma D, Li G. et al. Statistical use in clinical studies: is there evidence of a methodological shift?. PLoS one 2015; 10: e0140159 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140159.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Wasserstein RL, Schirm AL, Lazar NA. Moving to a world beyond “p < 0.05”. Am Stat 2019; 73: 1-19 DOI: 10.1080/00031305.2019.1583913.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Herbert RD. How to estimate treatment effects from reports of clinical trials. II: Dichotomous outcomes. Aust J Physiother 2000; 46: 309-313 DOI: 10.1016/s0004-9514(14)60292-0.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Sim J, Reid N. Statistical inference by confidence intervals: issues of interpretation and utilization. Phys Ther 1999; 79: 186-195 DOI: 10.1093/ptj/79.2.186.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Rothman KJ. Disengaging from statistical significance. Eur J Epidemiol 2016; 31: 443-444 DOI: 10.1007/s10654-016-0158-2.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Cumming G. Multivariate applications series. New York: Routledge; 2012
  Google Scholar
• 18 Kamper SJ. Showing confidence (intervals). Braz J Phys Ther 2019; 23: 277 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2019.01.003.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Kamper SJ. Confidence intervals: linking evidence to practice. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019; 49: 763-764 DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2019.0706.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Fidler F, Thomason N, Cumming G. et al. Editors can lead researchers to confidence intervals, but can’t make them think: Statistical reform lessons from medicine. Psychol Sci 2004; 15: 119-126 DOI: 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.01502008.x.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 R Core Team, Hrsg. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria; 2020. Im Internet (Stand: 01.12.2021): www.R-project.org/
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 RStudio Team, Hrsg. RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, Inc., Boston, USA; 2019. Im Internet (Stand: 01.12.2021): www.rstudio.com/
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Ferreira M. Research Note: The smallest worthwhile effect of a health intervention. J Physiother 2018; 64: 272-274 DOI: 10.1016/j.jphys.2018.07.008.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Amrhein V, Greenland S, McShane B. Scientists rise up against statistical significance. Nature 2019; 567: 305-307 DOI: 10.1038/d41586-019-00857-9.
  Google Scholar
• 25 Herbert R. Research Note: Significance testing and hypothesis testing: meaningless, misleading and mostly unnecessary. J Physiother 2019; 65: 178-181 DOI: 10.1016/j.jphys.2019.05.001.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Herbert RD, Jamtvedt G, Mead J. et al. Practical Evidence-Based Physiotherapy. 2. Aufl.. Oxford: Elsevier; 2011
  Google Scholar
• 27 Boos DD, Stefanski LA. P-Value Precision and Reproducibility. Am Stat 2011; 65: 213-221 DOI: 10.1198/tas.2011.10129.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Wasserstein R, Lazar N. The ASA’s Statement on p-Values: Context, Process, and Purpose. Am Stat 2016; 70: 129-133 DOI: 10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, Hrsg. ICMJE recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. 2013 Im Internet (Stand: 01.12.2021): www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 McGough JJ, Faraone SV. Estimating the size of treatment effects: moving beyond p values. Psychiatry 2009; 6: 21
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 Hayat MJ, Chandrasekhar R, Dietrich MS. et al. Moving Otology Beyond p < 0.05. Otol Neurotol 2020; 41: 578-579
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 32 Hayat MJ, Staggs VS, Schwartz TA. et al. Moving nursing beyond p < .05. Res Nurs Health 2019; 42: 244-245 DOI: 10.1002/nur.21954.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 33 Cumming G, Fidler F, Kalinowski P. et al. The statistical recommendations of the American Psychological Association Publication Manual: Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta‐analysis. Aust J Psychol 2012; 64: 138-146
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 Calin-Jageman RJ, Cumming G. Estimation for better inference in neuroscience. eNeuro 2019; 6 DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0205-19.2019.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 35 Schreiber JB. New paradigms for considering statistical significance: A way forward for health services research journals, their authors, and their readership. Res Social Adm Pharm 2020; 16: 591-594
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 36 Erickson RA, Rattner BA. Moving beyond p < 0.05 in ecotoxicology: A guide for practitioners. Environ Toxicol Chem 2020; 39: 1657-1669
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 37 Smith RJ. P > .05: The incorrect interpretation of “not significant” results is a significant problem. Am J Phys Anthropol 2020; 172: 521-527
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 38 Du Sert NP, Ahluwalia A, Alam S. et al. Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0. PLoS biology 2020; 18: e3000411
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar