But is this the correct interpretation of this outcome? Putting on our statistical hats, assume that NO alternative treatments were any better than placebos, and that Prof. Ernst and his team had examined their efficacy using a 95% cut-off for level of statistical significance. In what percentage of the studies would you expect them to (incorrectly) find that the treatment was statistically significant? (i.e. make a type-1 error) Ha ha!! Is that a coincidence??!
Sunday 22 May 2011
Alternative medicine and Statistics
A good article in this week's Economist Magazine summarises the overall results from one Professor Edzard Ernst's career spent testing the efficacy of alternative medical treatments. Overall his team has found statistically significant efficacy for 5% of all treatments studied. This was reported by the Economist as evidence that 5% of alternative medical treatments were "truly" effective.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Joseph Obi | Alternative Medicine Professor | Doctor Obi | Alternative Health Professor | Dr Obi | Alternative Healthcare Professor | Joseph Chikelue Obi Alternative Medicine Doctor
ReplyDeleteYou there, this is really good post here. Thanks for taking the time to post such valuable information. Quality content is what always gets the visitors coming. Retin A Creme
ReplyDeleteI am very much pleased with the contents you have mentioned. I wanted to thank you for this great article. chicago med season 5
ReplyDelete