» Articles » PMID: 20233437

A Nomogram for P Values

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2010 Mar 18
PMID 20233437
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: P values are the most commonly used tool to measure evidence against a hypothesis. Several attempts have been made to transform P values to minimum Bayes factors and minimum posterior probabilities of the hypothesis under consideration. However, the acceptance of such calibrations in clinical fields is low due to inexperience in interpreting Bayes factors and the need to specify a prior probability to derive a lower bound on the posterior probability.

Methods: I propose a graphical approach which easily translates any prior probability and P value to minimum posterior probabilities. The approach allows to visually inspect the dependence of the minimum posterior probability on the prior probability of the null hypothesis. Likewise, the tool can be used to read off, for fixed posterior probability, the maximum prior probability compatible with a given P value. The maximum P value compatible with a given prior and posterior probability is also available.

Results: Use of the nomogram is illustrated based on results from a randomized trial for lung cancer patients comparing a new radiotherapy technique with conventional radiotherapy.

Conclusion: The graphical device proposed in this paper will enhance the understanding of P values as measures of evidence among non-specialists.

Citing Articles

Significance test for linear regression: how to test without -values?.

Maneejuk P, Yamaka W J Appl Stat. 2022; 48(5):827-845.

PMID: 35707444 PMC: 9042140. DOI: 10.1080/02664763.2020.1748180.


Bayesian statistics in anesthesia practice: a tutorial for anesthesiologists.

Introna M, van den Berg J, Eleveld D, Struys M J Anesth. 2022; 36(2):294-302.

PMID: 35147768 PMC: 8967750. DOI: 10.1007/s00540-022-03044-9.


Reverse Bayesian Implications of p-Values Reported in Critical Care Randomized Trials.

Nostedt S, Joffe A J Intensive Care Med. 2021; 37(7):954-964.

PMID: 34841950 PMC: 9149268. DOI: 10.1177/08850666211053793.


Bayesian identification of candidate transcription factors for the regulation of gene expression.

Kikuchi H, Jung H, Raghuram V, Leo K, Park E, Yang C Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 2021; 321(3):F389-F401.

PMID: 34308668 PMC: 8530753. DOI: 10.1152/ajprenal.00204.2021.


Focal Autoimmune Pancreatitis: A Simple Flow Chart for a Challenging Diagnosis.

Conti C, Cereatti F, Drago A, Grassia R Ultrasound Int Open. 2021; 6(3):E67-E75.

PMID: 33490857 PMC: 7815440. DOI: 10.1055/a-1323-4906.


References
1.
Spiegelhalter D, Myles J, Jones D, Abrams K . Bayesian methods in health technology assessment: a review. Health Technol Assess. 2001; 4(38):1-130. View

2.
Deeks J, Altman D . Diagnostic tests 4: likelihood ratios. BMJ. 2004; 329(7458):168-9. PMC: 478236. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.329.7458.168. View

3.
Fagan T . Letter: Nomogram for Bayes's theorem. N Engl J Med. 1975; 293(5):257. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM197507312930513. View

4.
Hooper R . The Bayesian interpretation of a P-value depends only weakly on statistical power in realistic situations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009; 62(12):1242-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.02.004. View

5.
Goodman S . Toward evidence-based medical statistics. 2: The Bayes factor. Ann Intern Med. 1999; 130(12):1005-13. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-130-12-199906150-00019. View