Biostatistics & Epidemiology Core, Health Services & Outcomes Research, Children's Mercy Kansas City, 2401 Gillham Rd., Kansas City, MO, USA; School of Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City, 2411 Holmes St., Kansas City, MO, USA.
Int J Nurs Stud. 2019 Oct;98:87-93. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.06.012. Epub 2019 Jul 7.
In recent years several authors have documented common problems in the use of statistics in nursing research, including failure to consider the effects of multiple testing, inattention to clinical significance, and under-reporting of effect sizes and confidence intervals. More subtle forms of multiple testing are not as widely recognized, and abuse of researcher degrees of freedom has received little attention in the nursing research literature. These and other unsound practices in applying and interpreting statistics are problematic in themselves, and they arguably reflect an insufficiently clear understanding of statistical inference as a method for dealing with randomness among many researchers.
The goal of this educational paper is to improve the understanding and practice of inferential statistics among nursing researchers. An accessible explanation of hypothesis testing is provided, including discussion of the crucial concept of repeated sampling. Several pervasive mistakes and misconceptions in statistical inference are examined in detail, including misinterpretation of "non-significant" p-values as evidence for the null hypothesis, failure to account for forms of multiple testing that arise in model selection, abuse of researcher degrees of freedom, and hypothesis testing for baseline differences between arms in randomized trials. Recommendations for better statistical practice are offered.
For the foreseeable future classical methods of statistical inference based on the idea of repeated sampling will be the primary tools for quantifying randomness in nursing research. The hypothesis testing framework, despite its limitations, can be helpful in ruling out chance as an explanation for observed effects. Nursing researchers who use quantitative methods, as well as journal reviewers and editors, should understand this framework well. Those involved in educating nursing researchers and those who teach statistics would do well to ask what changes need to be made to raise the level of statistical practice in nursing research.
近年来,多位作者记录了护理研究中统计学应用的常见问题,包括未能考虑多次检验的影响、不关注临床意义以及未报告效应大小和置信区间。更微妙的多重检验形式并没有得到广泛认可,而且在护理研究文献中,滥用研究人员自由度的问题也很少受到关注。这些以及其他在应用和解释统计数据方面不健全的做法本身就存在问题,并且可以说反映了许多研究人员对统计推断作为处理随机性的方法的理解不够清晰。
本教育论文的目的是提高护理研究人员对推理统计学的理解和实践能力。提供了假设检验的通俗易懂的解释,包括对重复抽样的关键概念的讨论。详细检查了统计推断中几个普遍存在的错误和误解,包括将“无显著性”p 值错误解释为无效假设的证据、未能考虑模型选择中出现的多种检验形式、滥用研究人员自由度以及随机试验中臂间基线差异的假设检验。提供了更好的统计实践建议。
在可预见的未来,基于重复抽样思想的经典统计推断方法仍将是量化护理研究中随机性的主要工具。尽管假设检验框架存在局限性,但它有助于排除偶然因素作为观察到的效果的解释。使用定量方法的护理研究人员、期刊评审员和编辑应该很好地理解这个框架。参与教育护理研究人员以及教授统计学的人员应该很好地思考需要做出哪些改变,以提高护理研究中的统计实践水平。