惊喜！
Surprise!
出版信息
Am J Epidemiol. 2021 Feb 1;190(2):191-193. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwaa136.
Abstract
Measures of information and surprise, such as the Shannon information value (S value), quantify the signal present in a stream of noisy data. We illustrate the use of such information measures in the context of interpreting P values as compatibility indices. S values help communicate the limited information supplied by conventional statistics and cast a critical light on cutoffs used to judge and construct those statistics. Misinterpretations of statistics may be reduced by interpreting P values and interval estimates using compatibility concepts and S values instead of "significance" and "confidence."
摘要
信息和惊奇度量，如香农信息量（S 值），量化了噪声数据流中的信号。我们举例说明了在解释 P 值作为兼容性指数的上下文中使用这些信息度量的方法。S 值有助于传达传统统计学提供的有限信息，并对用于判断和构建这些统计学的截止值进行严格审查。通过使用兼容性概念和 S 值而不是“显著性”和“置信度”来解释 P 值和区间估计，可以减少对统计学的误解。
相似文献
1
Surprise!惊喜！
Am J Epidemiol. 2021 Feb 1;190(2):191-193. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwaa136.
2
Semantic and cognitive tools to aid statistical science: replace confidence and significance by compatibility and surprise.辅助统计科学的语义和认知工具：用兼容性和惊奇取代置信度和显著性。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 Sep 30;20(1):244. doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-01105-9.
3
To curb research misreporting, replace significance and confidence by compatibility: A Preventive Medicine Golden Jubilee article.为了遏制研究报告错误，用兼容性替代显著性和置信度：预防医学金禧文章。
Prev Med. 2022 Nov;164:107127. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2022.107127. Epub 2022 Jul 3.
4
Statistical tests, P values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations.统计检验、P 值、置信区间与检验效能：误解指南
Eur J Epidemiol. 2016 Apr;31(4):337-50. doi: 10.1007/s10654-016-0149-3. Epub 2016 May 21.
5
Misinterpretation of P Values and Statistical Power Creates a False Sense of Certainty: Statistical Significance, Lack of Significance, and the Uncertainty Challenge.对 P 值和统计功效的误解会产生一种错误的确定性：统计学显著性、非显著性和不确定性挑战。
Arthroscopy. 2021 Apr;37(4):1057-1063. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2021.02.010.
6
Statistical Significance Versus Clinical Importance of Observed Effect Sizes: What Do P Values and Confidence Intervals Really Represent?观察效应大小的统计学意义与临床重要性：P 值和置信区间真正代表什么？
Anesth Analg. 2018 Mar;126(3):1068-1072. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000002798.
7
A novel approach to quantify random error explicitly in epidemiological studies.一种在流行病学研究中明确量化随机误差的新方法。
Eur J Epidemiol. 2011 Dec;26(12):899-902. doi: 10.1007/s10654-011-9605-2. Epub 2011 Jul 30.
8
The fallacy of placing confidence in confidence intervals.对置信区间寄予信任的谬误。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Feb;23(1):103-23. doi: 10.3758/s13423-015-0947-8.
9
What your statistician never told you about P-values.关于P值，你的统计学家从未告诉你的事。
J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2003 Nov;10(4):439-44. doi: 10.1016/s1074-3804(05)60143-0.
10
Statistical estimates and clinical trials.统计估计与临床试验。
J Biopharm Stat. 1993 Sep;3(2):249-56. doi: 10.1080/10543409308835063.
引用本文的文献
1
Closing the multichannel gap through computational reconstruction of interaction in super-resolution microscopy.通过超分辨率显微镜中相互作用的计算重建来弥合多通道差距。
Patterns (N Y). 2025 Mar 27;6(5):101181. doi: 10.1016/j.patter.2025.101181. eCollection 2025 May 9.
2
Addressing common inferential mistakes when failing to reject the null-hypothesis.在未能拒绝原假设时处理常见的推理错误。
F1000Res. 2025 Apr 1;13:1488. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.158434.3. eCollection 2024.
3
P>0.05 Is Good: The NORD-h Protocol for Several Hypothesis Analysis Based on Known Risks, Costs, and Benefits.P>0.05 是有益的：基于已知风险、成本和效益的几种假设分析的NORD-h方案。
J Prev Med Public Health. 2024 Nov;57(6):511-520. doi: 10.3961/jpmph.24.250. Epub 2024 Sep 20.
4
For a proper use of frequentist inferential statistics in public health.关于在公共卫生中正确使用频率学派推断统计学。
Glob Epidemiol. 2024 Jun 15;8:100151. doi: 10.1016/j.gloepi.2024.100151. eCollection 2024 Dec.
5
Smoking prevalence and purchasing of menthol cigarettes since the menthol flavour ban in Great Britain: a population-based survey between 2020 and 2023.自英国薄荷醇口味禁令实施以来的吸烟率及薄荷醇香烟购买情况：2020年至2023年的一项基于人群的调查
Tob Control. 2024 Mar 12. doi: 10.1136/tc-2023-058390.
6
[The dramatic loss of statistical power when dichotomising continuous variables].[将连续变量二分法时统计功效的显著损失]
Rev Neurol. 2024 Jan 1;78(1):27-29. doi: 10.33588/rn.7801.2023163.
7
Cognitive, Psychophysiological, and Perceptual Responses to a Repeated Military-Specific Load Carriage Treadmill Simulation.认知、心理生理和知觉对重复的军事特定负重履带式跑步机模拟的反应。
Hum Factors. 2024 Oct;66(10):2379-2392. doi: 10.1177/00187208231214216. Epub 2023 Nov 28.
8
Interpreting Randomized Controlled Trials.解读随机对照试验
Cancers (Basel). 2023 Sep 22;15(19):4674. doi: 10.3390/cancers15194674.
9
-value, compatibility, and S-value.价值、兼容性和S值。
Glob Epidemiol. 2022 Sep 12;4:100085. doi: 10.1016/j.gloepi.2022.100085. eCollection 2022 Dec.
10
Seeing the Error in My "": A Quantified Degree of Belief Change Correlates with Children's Pupillary Surprise Responses Following Explicit Predictions.洞察我“”中的错误：明确预测后信念改变的量化程度与儿童瞳孔惊奇反应相关。
Entropy (Basel). 2023 Jan 21;25(2):211. doi: 10.3390/e25020211.
Zotero 插件