Editor, Editors, USER, admin, Bureaucrats, Check users, dev, editor, founder, Interface administrators, oversight, Suppressors, Administrators, translator
10,785
edits
Difference between revisions of "Introduction"
no edit summary
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
==Ab ovo<ref>Latin for 'since the very beginning'</ref>== | ==Ab ovo<ref>Latin for 'since the very beginning'</ref>== | ||
Before delving into the analysis of Masticationpedia, we must first introduce some preliminary considerations, particularly regarding two fundamental dimensions—social | Before delving into the analysis of Masticationpedia, we must first introduce some preliminary considerations, particularly regarding two fundamental dimensions—social and scientific-clinical aspect—that characterize both the present era and the one immediately preceding it. | ||
===The phases of paradigm change according to Thomas Kuhn=== | ===The phases of paradigm change according to Thomas Kuhn=== | ||
| Line 159: | Line 159: | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
*'''P-value''': In medicine, for example, we rely on statistical inference to confirm experimental results, specifically the P-value, a "significance test" that assesses data validity. Yet, even this entrenched concept is now being challenged. A recent study highlighted a campaign in the journal "Nature" against the use of the P-value.<ref>{{cita libro | *'''P-value''': In medicine, for example, we rely on statistical inference to confirm experimental results, specifically the {{Tooltip|P-value|2=The p-value represents the probability that observed results are due to chance, assuming the null hypothesis \( H_0 \) is true. It should not be used as a binary criterion (e.g., \( p < 0.05 \)) for scientific decisions, as values near the threshold require additional verification, such as cross-validation. *p-hacking* (repeating tests to achieve significance) increases false positives. Rigorous experimental design and transparency about all tests conducted can mitigate this risk. Type I error increases with multiple tests: for \( N \) independent tests at threshold \( \alpha \), the Family-Wise Error Rate (FWER) is \( FWER = 1 - (1 - \alpha)^N \). Bonferroni correction divides the threshold by the number of tests, \( p < \frac{\alpha}{N} \), but can increase false negatives. The False Discovery Rate (FDR) by Benjamini-Hochberg is less conservative, allowing more true discoveries with an acceptable proportion of false positives. The Bayesian approach uses prior knowledge to balance prior and data with a posterior distribution, offering a valid alternative to the p-value. To combine p-values from multiple studies, meta-analysis uses methods like Fisher's: \( \chi^2 = -2 \sum \ln(p_i) \). In summary, the p-value remains useful when contextualized and integrated with other measures, such as confidence intervals and Bayesian approaches.}}, a "significance test" that assesses data validity. Yet, even this entrenched concept is now being challenged. A recent study highlighted a campaign in the journal "Nature" against the use of the P-value.<ref>{{cita libro | ||
| autore = Amrhein V | | autore = Amrhein V | ||
| autore2 = Greenland S | | autore2 = Greenland S | ||