null hypothesis significance testing rarely determines H e a l t h M e d i c a l

null hypothesis significance testing rarely determines H e a l t h M e d i c a l

Statistical significance testing has dominated the way researchers typically report their results and evaluate their significance. This approach has been commonly used to determine the importance and generalizability of research results and to demonstrate the effect of an intervention in health research. However, this approach has limited use for clinicians and decision-makers trying to offer the best possible treatment to patients. Statistical significance does not assure that the results are clinically relevant. Indeed, the use of null hypothesis significance testing rarely determines the practical importance or clinical relevance of findings. Since public health specialists are interested in whether the intervention had an impact on clinical outcomes and also in the magnitude of such impact, relying solely on statistical significance to conclude about the relevance of results seems to be limited and insufficient (Armijo-Olivo, 2018).

Public health practice relies on the peer-reviewed public health literature for current research and findings that support an evidence basis for effective practice. Studies have shown that statistical literacy and knowledge are needed for understanding published research. The rapid growth and widespread availability of computing power and user-friendly statistical software packages in recent decades have led to the use of more advanced statistical methods and analyses being used and reported in the health literature. However, statistical training in public health may not have kept up with the modern data explosion and statistical complexities increasingly being applied in health studies and reported in scientific publications. A comprehensive understanding of statistical concepts and methods is essential for understanding current research and developing effective public health practice (Hayat et al., 2017).

Reference

Armijo-Olivo, S. (2018). The importance of determining the clinical significance of research results in Physical Therapy Clinical Research. Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy, 22(3), 175–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjpt.2018.02.001 

Hayat, M. J., Powell, A., Johnson, T., & Cadwell, B. L. (2017). Statistical methods used in the public health literature and implications for training of Public Health Professionals. PLOS ONE, 12(6). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179032 

Respond to the bold paragraph ABOVE by using one of the option below… in APA format with At least two references and a minimum of 200 words….. .(The List of References should not be older than 2016 and should not be included in the word count.) Include at least one scholarly reference and appropriate in-text citations and Address all points on the DQ. One point will be deducted for not addressing each item mentioned above. Remember that presenting someone else’s work as your own is plagiarism. 

  • Ask a probing question.
  • Share an insight from having read your colleague’s posting.
  • Offer and support an opinion.
  • Validate an idea with your own experience.
  • Make a suggestion.
  • Expand on your colleague’s posting.

Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources.

It is important that you cover all the topics identified in the assignment. Covering the topic does not mean mentioning the topic BUT presenting an explanation from the context of ethics and the readings for this class

To get maximum points you need to follow the requirements listed for this assignments 1) look at the word/page limits 2) review and follow APA rules 3) create subheadings to identify the key sections you are presenting and 4) Free from typographical and sentence construction errors.

REMEMBER IN APA FORMAT JOURNAL TITLES AND VOLUME NUMBERS ARE ITALICIZED.

References

American Psychological Association. Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th Ed.). Washington, DC: Author.