The Importance of Predefined Rules and Prespecified Statistical Analyses: Do Not Abandon Significance.

  title={The Importance of Predefined Rules and Prespecified Statistical Analyses: Do Not Abandon Significance.},
  author={John P. A. Ioannidis},
For decades, statisticians and clinicians have debated the meaning of statistical and clinical significance. In general, most journals remain married to the frequentist approach to statistical testing and using the term statistical significance. A recent proposal to ban statistical significance gained campaign-level momentum in a commentary with 854 recruited signatories.1 The petition proposes retaining P values but abandoning dichotomous statements (significant/nonsignificant), suggests… 
Abandoning statistical significance is both sensible and practical
To the Editor of JAMA Dr Ioannidis writes against our proposals to abandon statistical significance in scientific reasoning and publication, as endorsed in the editorial of a recent special
Détente: A Practical Understanding of P values and Bayesian Posterior Probabilities
  • S. Ruberg
  • Psychology
    Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics
  • 2020
The fundamental differences in NHST and Bayesian approaches are explained and how they can co‐exist harmoniously to guide clinical trial design and inference is demonstrated.
Statistical significance: p value, 0.05 threshold, and applications to radiomics—reasons for a conservative approach
The statement of the American Statistical Association against the misuse of statistical significance as well as the proposals to abandon the use of p value and to reduce the significance threshold from 0.05 to 0.005 are presented.
Rejecting Statistical Significance Tests: Defanging the Arguments
I critically analyze three groups of arguments for rejecting statistical significance tests (don’t say ‘significance’, don’t use P-value thresholds), as espoused in the 2019 Editorial of The American
Statistical significance and its critics: practicing damaging science, or damaging scientific practice?
While the common procedure of statistical significance testing and its accompanying concept of p-values have long been surrounded by controversy, renewed concern has been triggered by the replication
The p value wars (again)
  • U. Dirnagl
  • Psychology
    European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
  • 2019
The p value is at the heart of a much wider discussion which started in earnest about a decade ago in Psychology and quickly percolated through the life sciences in general, and where the p value, or rather its interpretation, takes center stage.
Statistical Significance versus Clinical Importance
If a study is conducted to check replicability of the previously published results of a study, reliance on P-value may lead to unwarranted claims of refutation or unwarranted denial of refutations, which are some of the reasons why several experts have risen against statistical significance.
The P Value and Statistical Significance: Misunderstandings, Explanations, Challenges, and Alternatives
  • C. Andrade
  • Education
    Indian journal of psychological medicine
  • 2019
Why 5% may be set as a reasonable cut-off for statistical significance, the correct interpretation of P < 0.05 and other values of P are explained, arguments for and against the concept of statistical significance are examined, and other and better ways for analyzing data are suggested.
Petitions in scientific argumentation: Dissecting the request to retire statistical significance
Signatories were surveyed and substantial heterogeneity in respondents' perceptions of the petition process, motivations for signing, and views on aspects of abandoning statistical significance was observed.


The Proposal to Lower P Value Thresholds to .005.
P values and accompanying methods of statistical significance testing are creating challenges in biomedical science and other disciplines because they are misinterpreted, overtrusted, and misused and these misconceptions affect researchers, journals, readers, and users of research articles, and even the public who consume scientific information.
Inappropriate Statistical Analysis and Reporting in Medical Research: Perverse Incentives and Institutional Solutions
A sobering report of a national survey of nearly 400 consulting statisticians about requests from investigators to engage in inappropriate statistical practices is presented, contributing to the problem of nonreproducible research.
Researcher Requests for Inappropriate Analysis and Reporting: A U.S. Survey of Consulting Biostatisticians
This study aimed to quantify and describe requests for inappropriate analysis and reporting thatBiostatisticians receive from investigators during their biostatistical consultations and to determine how well their survey sample represented the overall population of ASA members.
Moving to a World Beyond “p < 0.05”
Some of you exploring this special issue of The American Statistician might be wondering if it’s a scolding from pedantic statisticians lecturing you about what not to do with p-values, without
An atlas of genetic associations in UK Biobank
An atlas of genetic associations for 118 non-binary and 660 binary traits of 452,264 UK Biobank participants of European ancestry and this atlas allows researchers to query these results without incurring high computational costs is presented.
Scientists rise up against statistical significance
Valentin Amrhein, Sander Greenland, Blake McShane and more than 800 signatories call for an end to hyped claims and the dismissal of possibly crucial effects.Valentin Amrhein, Sander Greenland, Blake
Making sense of replications
The first results from the Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology suggest that there is scope for improving reproducibility in pre-clinical cancer research. DOI:
Distinguishing between Exploratory and Confirmatory Preclinical Research Will Improve Translation
It is argued that the key to improving preclinical research lies in distinguishing between two different modes of research: exploratory vs. confirmatory.