The fragility of trial results involves more than statistical significance alone
- 13 April 2020
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Elsevier BV in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Vol. 124, 34-41
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.02.011
Abstract
No abstract availableThis publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Minimally important difference estimates and methods: a protocolBMJ Open, 2015
- The statistical significance of randomized controlled trial results is frequently fragile: a case for a Fragility IndexJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2014
- Assessing methods to specify the target difference for a randomised controlled trial: DELTA (Difference ELicitation in TriAls) reviewHealth Technology Assessment, 2014
- An overview of robust methods in medical researchStatistical Methods in Medical Research, 2010
- How large must a treatment effect be before it matters to practitioners? An estimation method and demonstrationDrug and Alcohol Review, 2008
- Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of lifeJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2003
- Statistical significance and fragility criteria for assessing a difference of two proportionsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1991
- The unit fragility index: An additional appraisal of “statistical significance” for a contrast of two proportionsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1990
- Measurement of health status: Ascertaining the minimal clinically important differenceControlled Clinical Trials, 1989