Suppr超能文献

稳健性指数:通过量化脆弱性超越统计显著性

The Robustness Index: Going Beyond Statistical Significance by Quantifying Fragility.

作者信息

Heston Thomas F

机构信息

Medical Education and Clinical Sciences, Washington State University Spokane, Spokane, USA.

Family Medicine, University of Washington, Spokane, USA.

出版信息

Cureus. 2023 Aug 30;15(8):e44397. doi: 10.7759/cureus.44397. eCollection 2023 Aug.

Abstract

Statistical significance is widely used to evaluate research findings but has limitations around reproducibility. Measures of statistical fragility aim to quantify robustness against violations of assumptions. However, dependence on sample size and single unit changes restricts indices like the unit fragility index and the fragility quotient. The Robustness Index (RI) is proposed to overcome these limitations and quantify fragility independently of the research study's sample size. The RI measures how altering sample size affects significance. For insignificant findings, the sample size is multiplied until significance is reached; the multiplicand is the RI. The sample size is divided for significant research findings until insignificance is reached; the divisor is the RI. Thus, higher RIs indicate greater robustness of insignificant and significant research findings. The RI provides a simple, interpretable metric of fragility. It facilitates comparisons across studies and can potentially increase trust in biomedical research.

摘要

统计学显著性被广泛用于评估研究结果,但在可重复性方面存在局限性。统计脆弱性度量旨在量化针对假设违背的稳健性。然而,对样本量和单个单位变化的依赖限制了诸如单位脆弱性指数和脆弱性商数等指标。提出了稳健性指数(RI)以克服这些局限性,并独立于研究样本量来量化脆弱性。RI衡量改变样本量如何影响显著性。对于无显著性的结果,将样本量乘以某个数直到达到显著性;这个乘数就是RI。对于有显著性的研究结果,将样本量除以某个数直到变为无显著性;这个除数就是RI。因此,较高的RI表明无显著性和有显著性的研究结果具有更强的稳健性。RI提供了一个简单、可解释的脆弱性度量。它便于跨研究进行比较,并有可能增加对生物医学研究的信任。

相似文献

1
The Robustness Index: Going Beyond Statistical Significance by Quantifying Fragility.
Cureus. 2023 Aug 30;15(8):e44397. doi: 10.7759/cureus.44397. eCollection 2023 Aug.
2
4
Statistical Fragility of Ketamine Infusion During Scoliosis Surgery to Reduce Opioid Tolerance and Postoperative Pain.
World Neurosurg. 2022 Aug;164:135-142. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2022.04.121. Epub 2022 May 5.
5
The Fragility Index in Hand Surgery Randomized Controlled Trials.
J Hand Surg Am. 2019 Aug;44(8):698.e1-698.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2018.10.005. Epub 2018 Nov 9.
6
The Fragility of Statistical Significance in Sham Orthopaedic Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2023 Nov 1;31(21):e994-e1002. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-23-00245. Epub 2023 Sep 6.
7
The Statistical Fragility of Platelet-Rich Plasma as Treatment for Chronic Noninsertional Achilles Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Foot Ankle Orthop. 2022 Aug 28;7(3):24730114221119758. doi: 10.1177/24730114221119758. eCollection 2022 Jul.
8
The Fragility of Statistically Significant Randomized Controlled Trials in Plastic Surgery.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 Nov;144(5):1238-1245. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000006102.
9
The fragility of statistical findings in distal biceps tendon repairs: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2023 Aug;32(8):e379-e386. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2023.03.022. Epub 2023 Apr 17.
10
Fragility indices for only sufficiently likely modifications.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Dec 7;118(49). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2105254118.

引用本文的文献

1
Robustness Assessment of Oncology Dose-Finding Trials Using the Modified Fragility Index.
Cancers (Basel). 2024 Oct 17;16(20):3504. doi: 10.3390/cancers16203504.
2
Online haemodiafiltration and all-cause mortality: how fragile are the results of the studies published so far?
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2024 May 31;39(6):1034-1036. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfae003.
3

本文引用的文献

2
The reproducibility of research and the misinterpretation of -values.
R Soc Open Sci. 2017 Dec 6;4(12):171085. doi: 10.1098/rsos.171085. eCollection 2017 Dec.
3
The Fragility Index: a P-value in sheep's clothing?
Eur Heart J. 2017 Feb 1;38(5):346-348. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehw495.
4
Statistical tests, P values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations.
Eur J Epidemiol. 2016 Apr;31(4):337-50. doi: 10.1007/s10654-016-0149-3. Epub 2016 May 21.
5
How sample size influences research outcomes.
Dental Press J Orthod. 2014 Jul-Aug;19(4):27-9. doi: 10.1590/2176-9451.19.4.027-029.ebo.
6
Why most published research findings are false.
PLoS Med. 2005 Aug;2(8):e124. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124. Epub 2005 Aug 30.
7
Toward evidence-based medical statistics. 1: The P value fallacy.
Ann Intern Med. 1999 Jun 15;130(12):995-1004. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-130-12-199906150-00008.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验