Meta-analytical methods to identify who benefits most from treatments: daft, deluded, or deft approach?

BMJ · 2017 · PMC5421441 · PMID 28258124

Europe PMC DOI

hedged sentence

—

closest p

—

boldest claim

The sentences

likely to be significantno p-value reported

In practice, we found deluded analyses were more likely to be significant at the 5% level than deft analyses (16% v 6%).

also in 1,824 other papers

Quoted from the open-access full text in Europe PMC under the licence the publisher applied. The sentence is reproduced exactly as published; the emphasis is ours.