• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利：CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法，用中文像聊天一样搜索，搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐，让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版，准确专业，支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式，支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述，25分钟生成高质量综述，智能提取关键信息，辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

评估主要医学期刊中先前发表的随机临床试验将统计显著性的 P 值阈值从 0.05 降低至 0.005 的效果。

Evaluation of Lowering the P Value Threshold for Statistical Significance From .05 to .005 in Previously Published Randomized Clinical Trials in Major Medical Journals.

机构信息

Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa.

出版信息

JAMA. 2018 Nov 6;320(17):1813-1815. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.12288.

DOI:10.1001/jama.2018.12288
PMID:30398593
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6248098/
Abstract

This study evaluates primary end points in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published in 3 major general medical journals to determine how changing the value threshold for statistical significance from .05 to .005 could affect the interpretation of previously published RCTs.

摘要

本研究评估了发表在三大普通医学期刊上的随机临床试验（RCT）的主要终点，以确定将统计显著性的阈值从 0.05 更改为 0.005 会如何影响对先前发表的 RCT 的解释。

相似文献

1
Evaluation of Lowering the P Value Threshold for Statistical Significance From .05 to .005 in Previously Published Randomized Clinical Trials in Major Medical Journals.评估主要医学期刊中先前发表的随机临床试验将统计显著性的 P 值阈值从 0.05 降低至 0.005 的效果。
JAMA. 2018 Nov 6;320(17):1813-1815. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.12288.
2
Caution regarding the use of pilot studies to guide power calculations for study proposals.关于使用预试验来指导研究方案的功效计算的注意事项。
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006 May;63(5):484-9. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.63.5.484.
3
Post-hoc data analysis: benefits and limitations.事后数据分析：益处与局限
Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. 2013 Jun;13(3):223-4. doi: 10.1097/ACI.0b013e3283609831.
4
An evaluation of the quality and impact of the global research response to the COVID-19 pandemic.对全球针对新冠疫情的研究应对措施的质量和影响的评估。
Med J Aust. 2020 Oct;213(8):380-380.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50790. Epub 2020 Sep 18.
5
The architecture of clinical research (From the "Biostatistics and Epidemiology Lecture Series, Part 1").临床研究的架构（源自“生物统计学与流行病学系列讲座，第1部分”）
Cleve Clin J Med. 2017 Sep;84(9 Suppl 2):e2-e9. doi: 10.3949/ccjm.84.s2.02.
6
Research design and statistical methods in Indian medical journals: a retrospective survey.印度医学期刊中的研究设计与统计方法：一项回顾性调查
PLoS One. 2015 Apr 9;10(4):e0121268. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121268. eCollection 2015.
7
[Randomized clinical trials: variants, randomization methods, analysis, ethical issues and regulations].[随机临床试验：变体、随机化方法、分析、伦理问题与法规]
Salud Publica Mex. 2004 Nov-Dec;46(6):559-84. doi: 10.1590/s0036-36342004000600012.
8
Low power and type II errors in recent ophthalmology research.近期眼科研究中的低效能和II类错误
Can J Ophthalmol. 2016 Oct;51(5):368-372. doi: 10.1016/j.jcjo.2016.02.002. Epub 2016 Sep 3.
9
Process evaluation of complex cardiovascular interventions: How to interpret the results of my trial?复杂心血管介入治疗的过程评估：如何解读我的试验结果？
Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2020 Mar;19(3):269-274. doi: 10.1177/1474515120906561. Epub 2020 Feb 14.
10
The value of randomized clinical trials in ophthalmology.眼科随机临床试验的价值。
Am J Ophthalmol. 2011 Apr;151(4):575-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2010.12.006.

引用本文的文献

1
Impact of redefining statistical significance on P-hacking and false positive rates: An agent-based model.重新定义统计学显著性对 P 值操纵和假阳性率的影响：基于代理的模型。
PLoS One. 2024 May 16;19(5):e0303262. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0303262. eCollection 2024.
2
P Value Reporting and Reliability in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: A Primer for Readers and Investigators.整形与重建外科中的P值报告与可靠性：读者及研究者入门指南
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2025 Mar 1;155(3):579-584. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000011519. Epub 2024 May 6.
3
The impact of lowering the study design significance threshold to 0.005 on sample size in randomized cancer clinical trials.将研究设计显著性阈值降至0.005对随机癌症临床试验样本量的影响。
J Clin Transl Sci. 2023 Dec 18;8(1):e9. doi: 10.1017/cts.2023.699. eCollection 2024.
4
Statistical significance and publication reporting bias in abstracts of reproductive medicine studies.生殖医学研究摘要中的统计学显著性与发表报告偏倚
Hum Reprod. 2023 Nov 28;39(3):548-558. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dead248.
5
Lowering the statistical significance threshold of randomized controlled trials in three major general anesthesiology journals.降低三大普通麻醉学期刊随机对照试验的统计学显著性阈值。
Can J Anaesth. 2023 Sep;70(9):1441-1448. doi: 10.1007/s12630-023-02529-9. Epub 2023 Aug 10.
6
Association of Hospital Incentive Care Management Partnerships for Uninsured Patients With Emergency Department Utilization.医院激励式医保患者关怀管理合作关系与急诊就诊利用度的关联。
JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Jul 3;6(7):e2322798. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.22798.
7
Empirical assessment of fragility index based on a large database of clinical studies in the Cochrane Library.基于 Cochrane 图书馆中大量临床研究数据库的脆性指数的实证评估。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2023 Mar;29(2):359-370. doi: 10.1111/jep.13787. Epub 2022 Nov 2.
8
Validation of the Computerized Pediatric Triage Tool, , in the Pediatric Emergency Department of Lenval Children's Hospital in Nice: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study.法国尼斯莱瓦尔儿童医院急诊科计算机化儿科分诊工具的验证：一项横断面观察性研究
Front Pediatr. 2022 Apr 26;10:840181. doi: 10.3389/fped.2022.840181. eCollection 2022.
9
Potential effects of lowering the threshold of statistical significance in the field of chronic rhinosinusitis - A meta-research on published randomized controlled trials over last decade.降低慢性鼻-鼻窦炎研究领域统计学显著性阈值的潜在影响——对过去十年发表的随机对照试验的元研究。
Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2022 Nov-Dec;88 Suppl 5(Suppl 5):S83-S89. doi: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2021.11.004. Epub 2021 Dec 4.
10
Analysis of 567,758 randomized controlled trials published over 30 years reveals trends in phrases used to discuss results that do not reach statistical significance.对 30 多年来发表的 567758 项随机对照试验进行分析，揭示了用于讨论未达到统计学意义的结果的短语趋势。
PLoS Biol. 2022 Feb 18;20(2):e3001562. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001562. eCollection 2022 Feb.

本文引用的文献

1
Redefine statistical significance.重新定义统计学显著性。
Nat Hum Behav. 2018 Jan;2(1):6-10. doi: 10.1038/s41562-017-0189-z.
2
The Proposal to Lower P Value Thresholds to .005.将P值阈值降至0.005的提议。
JAMA. 2018 Apr 10;319(14):1429-1430. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.1536.
3
The extent and consequences of p-hacking in science.科学中的 p-值操纵的程度和后果。
PLoS Biol. 2015 Mar 13;13(3):e1002106. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002106. eCollection 2015 Mar.
4
Why most published research findings are false.为何大多数已发表的研究结果是错误的。
PLoS Med. 2005 Aug;2(8):e124. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124. Epub 2005 Aug 30.
5
The continuing unethical conduct of underpowered clinical trials.临床试验样本量不足这种持续存在的不道德行为。
JAMA. 2002 Jul 17;288(3):358-62. doi: 10.1001/jama.288.3.358.