We conducted a simulation study to illustrate that

Since 1999, experts have written about the inappropriate use of the ^{1–6} The primary concern is that a ^{7,8} In 2016, the American Statistical Association issued a formal statement clarifying the proper use and interpretation of the ^{9} The purpose of this article is to illustrate, with a simple simulated example, why small

We devised an example of a prevalence difference known to be epidemiologically insignificant or unimportant. The hypothesis is to test the prevalence difference of 2 interventions—A and B. To compute the ^{5} among men and 101.3 cases per 10^{5} among women.^{10} An intervention that closes that gap, that is, reduces the difference by 18.8%, would be epidemiologically important because closing the gap is a national goal. For our statistical simulation, the R statistical program^{11} was used and is available as the supplementary document.

Using the outcomes described above, data can be readily simulated with different sample sizes.

As shown in ^{9}
^{9} In the example provided, this is the only information the

In this article, we illustrated that ^{12} The threshold of 0.05 was intended to serve as an initial or preliminary indicator of potential statistical significance, neither final nor confirmatory. Some disciplines, such as genomics,^{13} have used

As shown in the simple example presented in this article, evidence of statistical significance is not evidence of clinical or epidemiological importance. Smaller

According to the ASA, “Cherry-picking effect sizes with small ^{9} One way to prevent spurious findings is to report both effect sizes and corresponding confidence intervals so that readers can decide for themselves if the difference (or ratio) in effect is big enough to be meaningful or important on the basis of clinical or epidemiological criteria of significance. In some cases, however, effect sizes are not applicable to the result of the statistical test—e.g., a goodness of fit test only yields a

Scientific writing tends to convey

Generally,

This project was supported in part by an appointment to the Research Participation Program at the National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), administered by the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education through an interagency agreement between the U.S. Department of Energy and CDC.

Conflict of interest: none declared.

Confidence interval for odds ratio (OR) versus sample size with the same absolute difference of 4%.