Sağlık Bilimlerindeki Araştırmalarda İstatistiksel Anlamlılık ve Klinik Uygunluk Arasındaki İlişkinin Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2024, Volume: 5 Issue: 1, 242 - 244, 30.04.2024

Mehmet Kaplan

https://doi.org/10.58605/bingolsaglik.1452046

An Erratum to this article was published on August 27, 2024. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/bingolsaglik/issue/84552/1518233

Abstract

Bu çalışma, sağlık bilimlerindeki araştırmalarda sıklıkla kullanılan istatistiksel analiz sonuçları ile klinik uygunluk arasındaki ilişkiyi değerlendirmeyi amaçlamıştır. İstatistiksel anlamlılık, bir sonucun tesadüfi olup olmadığını değerlendiren bir ölçütken, klinik uygunluk bir bulgunun gerçek dünya koşullarında önemli ya da yararlı olup olmadığını ifade etmektedir. Araştırmacılar, bir sonucun istatistiksel olarak anlamlı olmasının yanı sıra, klinik açıdan da uygun olup olmadığını değerlendirmelidir. Ayrıca araştırmacılar etki büyüklüğü, kapsamlı literatür incelemesi gibi konulara özellikle dikkat etmelidir. Sonuç olarak sahada uygulanacak girişimlerde istatistik anlamlılık önemlidir. Ancak tek başına yeterli değildir. Dolayısıyla bilimsel araştırmalardan elde edilen sonuçlar hem istatistiksel anlamlılık yönünden hem de klinik uygunluk yönünden değerlendirilmelidir.

Keywords

Sağlık, Araştırma, İstatistiksel Anlamlılık, Klinik Uygunluk

Ethical Statement

-

Supporting Institution

-

Project Number

-

Thanks

-

Evaluation of the Relationship Between Statistical Significance and Clinical Relevance in Research in Health Sciences

An Erratum to this article was published on August 27, 2024. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/bingolsaglik/issue/84552/1518233

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between the results of statistical analyses frequently used in health sciences research and clinical relevance. While statistical significance is a criterion that evaluates whether a result is random, clinical relevance refers to whether a finding is important or useful in real world conditions. Researchers should assess whether an outcome is clinically relevant as well as statistically significant. In addition, researchers should pay particular attention to issues such as effect size and comprehensive literature review. As a result, statistical significance is important in interventions to be applied in the field. However, it is not sufficient alone. Therefore, the results obtained from scientific research should be evaluated both in terms of statistical significance and clinical relevance.

Keywords

Health, Research, Statistical Significance, Clinical Relevance

Project Number

-

References

• Krause MS. Statistical significance testing and clinical trials. Psychotherapy (Chic). 2011;48(3):217-22. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022088
• Amrhein V, Greenland S, McShane B. Scientists rise up against statistical significance. Nature. 2019;567(7748):305-7. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-00857-9
• Chander NG. Beyond statistical significance. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2019;19(3):201-2. https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_207_19
• Greenhalgh T, Howick J, Maskrey N, Evidence Based Medicine Renaissance Group. Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis? BMJ. 2014;348:g3725. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g3725
• Kravitz RL, Duan N, Eslick I, Gabler NB, Kaplan HC, Larson E. Design and implementation of N-of-1 trials: a user’s guide. Agency for healthcare research and quality, US Department of Health and Human Services; 2014.
• Sharma H. Statistical significance or clinical significance? A researcher’s dilemma for appropriate interpretation of research results. Saudi J Anaesth. 2021;15(4):431-4. https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.sja_158_21
• Andrei AC. Statistical significance: is there a way out of it? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2021;161(4):1377-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2020.04.138
• Vishnu VY, Vinny PW. Statistical significance and clinical importance. Neurol India. 2021;69(5):1509. https://doi.org/10.4103/0028-3886.329535
• Pandis N. The effect size. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012;142(5):739-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.06.011
• 1Sullivan GM, Feinn R. Using effect size or why the P value is not enough. Journal of graduate medical education, 2012;4(3):279-82.
• Terwee CB. Estimating minimal clinically important differences and minimal detectable change. J Hand Surg Am. 2019;44(12):e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2019.10.001
• Benjamin DJ, Berger JO, Johannesson M, Nosek BA, Wagenmakers EJ, Berk R, Johnson VE. Redefine statistical significance. Nature human behaviour. 2018;2(1):6-10.
• Nakagawa S, Lagisz M, Yang Y, Drobniak SM. Finding the right power balance: Better study design and collaboration can reduce dependence on statistical power. Plos Biology, 2024;22(1):e3002423.
• Akbulut Ö. Bilimsel Araştırmalarda istatistiksel anlamlılığın raporlanmasında güncel yaklaşımlar: Hatalar ve doğrular. International Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Agricultural Research, 2022;5(1):1-19.
• Pontes-Silva A. Statistical significance does not show clinical relevance: we need to go beyond the P-value. J Clin Exp Hepatol. 2022;12(5):1402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jceh.2022.04.017
• McClellan J. Clinical relevance versus statistical significance. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2017;56(12):1008-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2017.09.431
• Amrhein V, Greenland S, McShane B. Scientists rise up against statistical significance. Nature, 2019;567(7748):305-07.
• McShane BB, Gal D, Gelman A, Robert C, Tackett JL. Abandon statistical significance. The American Statistician, 2019;73(sup1):235-45.