Cargando…

“Magnitude-based Inference”: A Statistical Review

PURPOSE: We consider “magnitude-based inference” and its interpretation by examining in detail its use in the problem of comparing two means. METHODS: We extract from the spreadsheets, which are provided to users of the analysis (http://www.sportsci.org/), a precise description of how “magnitude-bas...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Welsh, Alan H., Knight, Emma J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5642352/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25051387
http://dx.doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000000451
_version_ 1783271351149133824
author Welsh, Alan H.
Knight, Emma J.
author_facet Welsh, Alan H.
Knight, Emma J.
author_sort Welsh, Alan H.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: We consider “magnitude-based inference” and its interpretation by examining in detail its use in the problem of comparing two means. METHODS: We extract from the spreadsheets, which are provided to users of the analysis (http://www.sportsci.org/), a precise description of how “magnitude-based inference” is implemented. We compare the implemented version of the method with general descriptions of it and interpret the method in familiar statistical terms. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We show that “magnitude-based inference” is not a progressive improvement on modern statistics. The additional probabilities introduced are not directly related to the confidence interval but, rather, are interpretable either as P values for two different nonstandard tests (for different null hypotheses) or as approximate Bayesian calculations, which also lead to a type of test. We also discuss sample size calculations associated with “magnitude-based inference” and show that the substantial reduction in sample sizes claimed for the method (30% of the sample size obtained from standard frequentist calculations) is not justifiable so the sample size calculations should not be used. Rather than using “magnitude-based inference,” a better solution is to be realistic about the limitations of the data and use either confidence intervals or a fully Bayesian analysis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5642352
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56423522017-10-24 “Magnitude-based Inference”: A Statistical Review Welsh, Alan H. Knight, Emma J. Med Sci Sports Exerc SPECIAL COMMUNICATIONS: Invited Commentary PURPOSE: We consider “magnitude-based inference” and its interpretation by examining in detail its use in the problem of comparing two means. METHODS: We extract from the spreadsheets, which are provided to users of the analysis (http://www.sportsci.org/), a precise description of how “magnitude-based inference” is implemented. We compare the implemented version of the method with general descriptions of it and interpret the method in familiar statistical terms. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We show that “magnitude-based inference” is not a progressive improvement on modern statistics. The additional probabilities introduced are not directly related to the confidence interval but, rather, are interpretable either as P values for two different nonstandard tests (for different null hypotheses) or as approximate Bayesian calculations, which also lead to a type of test. We also discuss sample size calculations associated with “magnitude-based inference” and show that the substantial reduction in sample sizes claimed for the method (30% of the sample size obtained from standard frequentist calculations) is not justifiable so the sample size calculations should not be used. Rather than using “magnitude-based inference,” a better solution is to be realistic about the limitations of the data and use either confidence intervals or a fully Bayesian analysis. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2015-04 2015-03-17 /pmc/articles/PMC5642352/ /pubmed/25051387 http://dx.doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000000451 Text en Copyright © 2014 by the American College of Sports Medicine This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License, where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.
spellingShingle SPECIAL COMMUNICATIONS: Invited Commentary
Welsh, Alan H.
Knight, Emma J.
“Magnitude-based Inference”: A Statistical Review
title “Magnitude-based Inference”: A Statistical Review
title_full “Magnitude-based Inference”: A Statistical Review
title_fullStr “Magnitude-based Inference”: A Statistical Review
title_full_unstemmed “Magnitude-based Inference”: A Statistical Review
title_short “Magnitude-based Inference”: A Statistical Review
title_sort “magnitude-based inference”: a statistical review
topic SPECIAL COMMUNICATIONS: Invited Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5642352/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25051387
http://dx.doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000000451
work_keys_str_mv AT welshalanh magnitudebasedinferenceastatisticalreview
AT knightemmaj magnitudebasedinferenceastatisticalreview