Scholarlink

<p>The p-value has long been a cornerstone of evidence-based medicine, yet its misuse and misinterpretation are rampant. The Fragility Index (FI), developed to offer a more intuitive measure of statistical robustness, paradoxically penalizes well-designed, efficient clinical trials and remains tethered to the arbitrary <i>p</i> &lt; 0.05 threshold. This commentary argues that both the p-value and the FI are insufficient as they operate within the flawed framework of Null Hypothesis Significance Testing. We propose that a shift towards a Bayesian framework is necessary. Bayesian methods, particularly the use of the Bayes Factor, align more closely with clinical reasoning by providing a direct measure of evidence for a hypothesis, allowing for a more nuanced, probabilistic approach to interpreting research findings and updating clinical beliefs.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The Fragility of Significance: Why P-values and the Fragility Index Are Not Enough

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月10日

查看全文
  • Mufaddal Kazi

摘要

The p-value has long been a cornerstone of evidence-based medicine, yet its misuse and misinterpretation are rampant. The Fragility Index (FI), developed to offer a more intuitive measure of statistical robustness, paradoxically penalizes well-designed, efficient clinical trials and remains tethered to the arbitrary p < 0.05 threshold. This commentary argues that both the p-value and the FI are insufficient as they operate within the flawed framework of Null Hypothesis Significance Testing. We propose that a shift towards a Bayesian framework is necessary. Bayesian methods, particularly the use of the Bayes Factor, align more closely with clinical reasoning by providing a direct measure of evidence for a hypothesis, allowing for a more nuanced, probabilistic approach to interpreting research findings and updating clinical beliefs.