Statistical interpretation can also bias research evidence

doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7417.752-a

From trainee to consultant, BMJ Group offers doctors around the world tailored information, special events, learning resources and recruitment services at every step along their career path.

... by doctors, for doctors, for patients
We are open for entries!

Online learning

BMJ Learning

High-quality CME / CPD for doctors and other healthcare professionals. BMJ Learning features hundreds of accredited, peer-reviewed learning modules in text, video, and audio formats. Find out more

Courses and Qualifications

BMJ Masterclasses

BMJ Masterclasses, led by experts, help clinicians to use the latest evidence and recent guidelines in practice and meet their CPD/CME requirements. Find out more

Exam Preparation

The leading provider of online exam preparation, helping over 167,000 healthcare professionals to pass their exams. Find out more

onExamination

Search all BMJ comment articles:

From

Limit by

Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription or payment. Please log in or subscribe below.

Lorne Basskin,, president (lbasskin@hotmail.com)

Trinka Medical Education and Publications, 11100 Minneapolis Drive, Cooper City, FL 33026, USA

EDITOR–Kaptchuk discussed the effect of interpretive bias on research evidence.1 Let me add one more example. Studies are designed to determine whether “a statistically significant difference” exists between the outcomes of two alternative treatments. If no difference is discovered the temptation for authors is to conclude that the treatment under investigation is “just …