Statistical Significance

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