Statistically significant differences versus convincing evidence of real treatment effects: an analysis of the false positive risk for single-centre trials in anaesthesia.

Background: The American Statistical Association has highlighted problems with null hypothesis significance testing and outlined alternative approaches that may 'supplement or even replace P-values'. One alternative is to report the false positive risk (FPR), which quantifies the chance the null hypothesis is true when the result is statistically significant.

Methods: We reviewed single-centre, randomised trials in 10 anaesthesia journals over 6 yr where differences in a primary binary outcome were statistically significant.

Interpreting frequentist hypothesis tests: insights from Bayesian inference.

Randomized controlled trials are one of the best ways of quantifying the effectiveness of medical interventions. Therefore, when the authors of a randomized superiority trial report that differences in the primary outcome between the intervention group and the control group are "significant" (i.e.

Dead-Space Ventilation Indices and Mortality in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objectives: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is associated with high ventilation-perfusion heterogeneity and dead-space ventilation. However, whether the degree of dead-space ventilation is associated with outcomes is uncertain. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we evaluated the ability of dead-space ventilation measures to predict mortality in patients with ARDS.