Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1098/rsos.140216 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1098/rsos.140216 C4448847!4448847!26064558     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       R+Soc+Open+Sci 2014 ; 1 (3): ä Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=26064558|t=2014. An investigation of the false discovery rate and the misinterpretation of p-values |pdf=|usr=}}{{26064558}} gab.com Text An investigation of the false discovery rate and the misinterpretation of p-values JO: R Soc Open Sci http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=26064558 #FOAvip If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you have made a discovery, you will be wrong at least 30% of the time. If, as is often the case, experiments are underpowered, you will be wrong most of the time. This conclusion is demonstrated from several points of view. First, tree diagrams which show the close analogy with the screening test problem. Similar conclusions are drawn by repeated simulations of t-tests. These mimic what is done in real life, which makes the results more persuasive. The simulation method is used also to evaluate the extent to which effect sizes are over-estimated, especially in underpowered experiments. A script is supplied to allow the reader to do simulations themselves, with numbers appropriate for their own work. It is concluded that if you wish to keep your false discovery rate below 5%, you need to use a three-sigma rule, or to insist on p?0.001. And never use the word ?significant?. Twit Text FOAVip An investigation of the false discovery rate and the misinterpretation of p-values ????R Soc Open Sci http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=26064558 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=26064558 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|26064558}}</ref> An investigation of the false discovery rate and the misinterpretation of p-values #MMPMID26064558 Colquhoun D R Soc Open Sci 2014[Nov]; 1 (3): ä PMID26064558show ga If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you have made a discovery, you will be wrong at least 30% of the time. If, as is often the case, experiments are underpowered, you will be wrong most of the time. This conclusion is demonstrated from several points of view. First, tree diagrams which show the close analogy with the screening test problem. Similar conclusions are drawn by repeated simulations of t-tests. These mimic what is done in real life, which makes the results more persuasive. The simulation method is used also to evaluate the extent to which effect sizes are over-estimated, especially in underpowered experiments. A script is supplied to allow the reader to do simulations themselves, with numbers appropriate for their own work. It is concluded that if you wish to keep your false discovery rate below 5%, you need to use a three-sigma rule, or to insist on p?0.001. And never use the word ?significant?. äAn investigation of the false discovery rate and the misinterpretation(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing