Open AccessImpact of your results: Beyond the relative risk
Author(s) -
Siegerink Bob,
Rohmann Jessica L.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2475-0379
DOI - 10.1002/rth2.12148
Subject(s) - relative risk , context (archaeology) , relative value , relevance (law) , confidence interval , intervention (counseling) , statement (logic) , risk analysis (engineering) , actuarial science , psychology , medicine , statistics , mathematics , epistemology , business , political science , geography , philosophy , archaeology , finance , psychiatry , law
Universally, reporting guidelines emphasize the importance of using point estimates that indicate the strength of an effect. A single statement of the presence (or absence) of “statistical significance” and/or a P value alone do not provide sufficient information. Instead, an estimate of relative risk with a corresponding confidence interval should be routinely provided. Unfortunately, the context of the reported relative risk is often omitted, thereby hampering the readers’ understanding of the impact of the results. Additionally, commonly used binary outcomes might not be sensitive enough to fully convey the clinical relevance of an intervention or risk factor. This tutorial underlines the role of the context of results presented in clinical research papers. It also provides suggestions of meaningful ways to illustrate the impact of your own results by going beyond the relative risk.