Abstract
Because biological processes are full of variations, statistics can not give you certainties, but only chances. What kind of chances? Basically, the chances that prior hypotheses are true or untrue. The human brain excels in making hypotheses. We make hypotheses all the time, but they may be untrue. E.g., when you were a kid, you thought that only girls could become doctors, because your family doctor was a girl. Later on this hypothesis appeared to be untrue. In clinical medicine we currently emphasize that hypotheses may be equally untrue and must be assessed prospectively with hard data. That’s where statistics comes in, and that is where at the same time many a clinician starts to become nervous, loses his/her self-confidence, and is more than willing to leave his/her data to the statistical consultant who subsequently runs the data through a whole series of statistical tests of SAS1 or SPSS2 or comparable statistical computer software to see if there are any significances. The current article was written to emphasize that the above scenario of analyzing clinical trial data is bad practice and frequently kills the data, and that biostatistics can do more for you than provide you with a host of irrelevant p-values.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
SAS Statistical Software 2000 New York, NY, USA.
SPSS Statistical Software 2000 Chicago, IL, USA.
Cleophas TJ. Methods for improving drug trials. Clin Chem Lab Med 1999; 37: 1035–1041.
Cleophas TJ, Zwinderman AH. Limits of randomized trials, proposed alternative designs. Clin Chem Lab Med 200; 38: 1217–1223.
Farewell VT, Dángio GJ. Report of the National Wilms’ Tumor Study Group. Biometrics 1981; 37: 169–176.
Sacks H, Chalmers TC, Smith H. Randomized versus historical controls for clinical trials. Am J Med 1982; 72: 233–240.
Pocock SJ 1988 Clinical trials. A practical approach. Wiley, New York, USA
Whitehead J 1998 Planning and Evaluating Sequential Trials (PEST, version 3). Reading: University of Reading (http://www.reading.ac.uk/mps/pest/pest.html)
Lauter J. Exact t and F-tests for analyzing studies with multiple endpoints. Biometrics 1996; 52: 964–970.
Medical Research Council. Streptomycin Treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis. Br Med J 1948; 2: 769–782.
Yusuf S, Pepine CJ, Garces C. Effect of enalapril on myocardial infarction and angina pectoris in patients with low ejection fraction. Lancet 1992; 340: 1173–1178.
Campbell JP, Maxey VA, Watson WA. Hawthorne effect: implications for prehospital research. Ann Emergency Med 1995; 26: 590–594.
Cleophas TJ. The use of a placebo-control group in clinical trials. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1997; 43: 219–221.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cleophas, T.J., Zwinderman, A.H., Cleophas, T.F. (2006). Statistics is No “Bloodless” Algebra. In: Statistics Applied to Clinical Trials. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4650-6_30
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4650-6_30
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-4229-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-4650-6
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)