A little fact for anyone still unsure about statistical significance.
A study outcome may be statistically significant, but not be clinically significant and vice versa. You can search this type of information on drug trials in many peer reviewed articles.
This is easily understood by presenting an example such as this.
Vehicle -2% Reduction in Clarence's zits
CBD -10% Reduction in Abigail's zits
CBD works 5x better than the vehicle in this instance. It's statistically significant, but it's rubbish because its clinical significance isn't worth a damn. Same goes for the opposite. The case we are all too familiar with. The clinical significance was fantastic. Its comparison to the vehicle was very strange in one arm of the study.
Sure it would have been nice to have both clinical and statistically significant data, but the data Botanix is needed to push on is what they got. The rest is to be ironed out.
Phase 2 is to understand the model that's needed for phase 3 and FDA approval.
It's now abundantly clear
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- BOT
- Statistical Significance
Statistical Significance
-
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 9 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Add BOT (ASX) to my watchlist
|
|||||
Last
41.5¢ |
Change
0.000(0.00%) |
Mkt cap ! $752.8M |
Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
41.0¢ | 43.5¢ | 41.0¢ | $2.989M | 7.071M |
Buyers (Bids)
No. | Vol. | Price($) |
---|---|---|
5 | 408524 | 41.5¢ |
Sellers (Offers)
Price($) | Vol. | No. |
---|---|---|
42.0¢ | 30000 | 1 |
View Market Depth
No. | Vol. | Price($) |
---|---|---|
5 | 408524 | 0.415 |
7 | 416474 | 0.410 |
10 | 622210 | 0.405 |
12 | 590183 | 0.400 |
7 | 403387 | 0.395 |
Price($) | Vol. | No. |
---|---|---|
0.420 | 30000 | 1 |
0.425 | 185685 | 2 |
0.430 | 193960 | 6 |
0.435 | 101072 | 3 |
0.440 | 580977 | 10 |
Last trade - 16.10pm 06/09/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
Featured News
BOT (ASX) Chart |