TY - JOUR
T1 - Why rehabilitation research does not work (As well as we think it should)
AU - Ottenbacher, Kenneth J.
N1 - Funding Information:
From the State University of New York at Buffalo, NY. Submitted for publication March 30, 1994. Accepted in revised form July 18, 1994. Supported in part by a grant from the NIDRR during the completion of this research (Grant No. HI33B30041). No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit upon the authors or upon any organizations with which the authors are associated. Reprint requests to Kenneth J. Ottenbaeher, PbD, SUNY at Buffalo, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Center for Functional Assessment Research, 232 Parker Hall, 3435 Main Street, Buffalo, NY 14214. © 1995 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 0003-9993/95/7602-303253.00/0
Copyright:
Copyright 2014 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 1995/2
Y1 - 1995/2
N2 - Establishing treatment effectiveness is a high priority for rehabilitation research. The use of traditional quantitative null hypotheses to achieve this priority is reviewed. Three problems are identified in the analysis and interpretation of investigations based on statistical testing of hypotheses: (1) confusion of clinical and statistical significance, (2) low statistical power in detecting clinically important results, and (3) a failure to understand the importance of replication in developing a knowledge base for rehabilitation practice. Technical aspects associated with each problem are reviewed and examples presented illustrating the impact of low statistical power and the results of misinterpreting statistical significance tests. Several specific recommendations are made to improve the clinical usefulness of quantitative research conducted in rehabilitation.
AB - Establishing treatment effectiveness is a high priority for rehabilitation research. The use of traditional quantitative null hypotheses to achieve this priority is reviewed. Three problems are identified in the analysis and interpretation of investigations based on statistical testing of hypotheses: (1) confusion of clinical and statistical significance, (2) low statistical power in detecting clinically important results, and (3) a failure to understand the importance of replication in developing a knowledge base for rehabilitation practice. Technical aspects associated with each problem are reviewed and examples presented illustrating the impact of low statistical power and the results of misinterpreting statistical significance tests. Several specific recommendations are made to improve the clinical usefulness of quantitative research conducted in rehabilitation.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028815789&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028815789&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0003-9993(95)80021-2
DO - 10.1016/S0003-9993(95)80021-2
M3 - Article
C2 - 7848070
AN - SCOPUS:0028815789
SN - 0003-9993
VL - 76
SP - 123
EP - 129
JO - Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
JF - Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
IS - 2
ER -