The Fragility of Significance in the Hip Arthroscopy Literature

Background:. The purpose of the present study was to perform the first examination of the utility of p values and the degree of statistical fragility in the hip arthroscopy literature by applying both the Fragility Index (FI) and the Fragility Quotient (FQ) to dichotomous comparative trials. We hypo...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Robert L. Parisien, MD, David P. Trofa, MD, Michaela O’Connor, BA, Brock Knapp, BA, Emily J. Curry, BA, Paul Tornetta, III, MD, T. Sean Lynch, MD, Xinning Li, MD
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/150f04ffb07948569b18e172dd72b3f3
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:150f04ffb07948569b18e172dd72b3f3
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:150f04ffb07948569b18e172dd72b3f32021-11-25T07:59:02ZThe Fragility of Significance in the Hip Arthroscopy Literature2472-724510.2106/JBJS.OA.21.00035https://doaj.org/article/150f04ffb07948569b18e172dd72b3f32021-12-01T00:00:00Zhttp://journals.lww.com/jbjsoa/fulltext/10.2106/JBJS.OA.21.00035https://doaj.org/toc/2472-7245Background:. The purpose of the present study was to perform the first examination of the utility of p values and the degree of statistical fragility in the hip arthroscopy literature by applying both the Fragility Index (FI) and the Fragility Quotient (FQ) to dichotomous comparative trials. We hypothesized that dichotomous comparative trials evaluating categorical outcomes in the hip arthroscopy literature are statistically fragile. Methods:. The PubMed and MEDLINE databases were queried from 2008-2018 for comparative studies evaluating dichotomous data in the hip arthroscopy literature. The present analysis included both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs in which dichotomous data and associated p values were reported. Fragility analysis was performed with use of the Fisher exact test until an alteration of significance was determined. Results:. Of the 5,836 studies screened, 4,156 met the search criteria, with 52 comparative studies included for analysis. One hundred and fifty total outcome events with 33 significant (p < 0.05) outcomes and 117 nonsignificant (p ≥ 0.05) outcomes were identified. The final FI incorporating all 150 outcome events from 52 comparative studies was only 3.5 (interquartile range, 2 to 6), with an associated FQ of 0.032 (interquartile range, 0.017 to 0.063). Twenty-two studies (42.3%) either failed to report loss to follow-up (LTF) data or reported LTF greater than the overall FI of 3.5. Conclusions:. The peer-reviewed hip arthroscopy literature may not be as stable as previously thought, as the sole reliance on a threshold p value has proven misleading. We therefore recommend reporting of the FI and FQ, in conjunction with p values, to aid in the evaluation and interpretation of statistical robustness and quantitative significance in future comparative hip arthroscopy studies.Robert L. Parisien, MDDavid P. Trofa, MDMichaela O’Connor, BABrock Knapp, BAEmily J. Curry, BAPaul Tornetta, III, MDT. Sean Lynch, MDXinning Li, MDWolters KluwerarticleOrthopedic surgeryRD701-811ENJBJS Open Access, Vol 6, Iss 4 (2021)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic Orthopedic surgery
RD701-811
spellingShingle Orthopedic surgery
RD701-811
Robert L. Parisien, MD
David P. Trofa, MD
Michaela O’Connor, BA
Brock Knapp, BA
Emily J. Curry, BA
Paul Tornetta, III, MD
T. Sean Lynch, MD
Xinning Li, MD
The Fragility of Significance in the Hip Arthroscopy Literature
description Background:. The purpose of the present study was to perform the first examination of the utility of p values and the degree of statistical fragility in the hip arthroscopy literature by applying both the Fragility Index (FI) and the Fragility Quotient (FQ) to dichotomous comparative trials. We hypothesized that dichotomous comparative trials evaluating categorical outcomes in the hip arthroscopy literature are statistically fragile. Methods:. The PubMed and MEDLINE databases were queried from 2008-2018 for comparative studies evaluating dichotomous data in the hip arthroscopy literature. The present analysis included both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs in which dichotomous data and associated p values were reported. Fragility analysis was performed with use of the Fisher exact test until an alteration of significance was determined. Results:. Of the 5,836 studies screened, 4,156 met the search criteria, with 52 comparative studies included for analysis. One hundred and fifty total outcome events with 33 significant (p < 0.05) outcomes and 117 nonsignificant (p ≥ 0.05) outcomes were identified. The final FI incorporating all 150 outcome events from 52 comparative studies was only 3.5 (interquartile range, 2 to 6), with an associated FQ of 0.032 (interquartile range, 0.017 to 0.063). Twenty-two studies (42.3%) either failed to report loss to follow-up (LTF) data or reported LTF greater than the overall FI of 3.5. Conclusions:. The peer-reviewed hip arthroscopy literature may not be as stable as previously thought, as the sole reliance on a threshold p value has proven misleading. We therefore recommend reporting of the FI and FQ, in conjunction with p values, to aid in the evaluation and interpretation of statistical robustness and quantitative significance in future comparative hip arthroscopy studies.
format article
author Robert L. Parisien, MD
David P. Trofa, MD
Michaela O’Connor, BA
Brock Knapp, BA
Emily J. Curry, BA
Paul Tornetta, III, MD
T. Sean Lynch, MD
Xinning Li, MD
author_facet Robert L. Parisien, MD
David P. Trofa, MD
Michaela O’Connor, BA
Brock Knapp, BA
Emily J. Curry, BA
Paul Tornetta, III, MD
T. Sean Lynch, MD
Xinning Li, MD
author_sort Robert L. Parisien, MD
title The Fragility of Significance in the Hip Arthroscopy Literature
title_short The Fragility of Significance in the Hip Arthroscopy Literature
title_full The Fragility of Significance in the Hip Arthroscopy Literature
title_fullStr The Fragility of Significance in the Hip Arthroscopy Literature
title_full_unstemmed The Fragility of Significance in the Hip Arthroscopy Literature
title_sort fragility of significance in the hip arthroscopy literature
publisher Wolters Kluwer
publishDate 2021
url https://doaj.org/article/150f04ffb07948569b18e172dd72b3f3
work_keys_str_mv AT robertlparisienmd thefragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
AT davidptrofamd thefragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
AT michaelaoconnorba thefragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
AT brockknappba thefragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
AT emilyjcurryba thefragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
AT paultornettaiiimd thefragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
AT tseanlynchmd thefragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
AT xinninglimd thefragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
AT robertlparisienmd fragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
AT davidptrofamd fragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
AT michaelaoconnorba fragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
AT brockknappba fragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
AT emilyjcurryba fragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
AT paultornettaiiimd fragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
AT tseanlynchmd fragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
AT xinninglimd fragilityofsignificanceinthehiparthroscopyliterature
_version_ 1718413542788431872