Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 28, 2026
Hypoxia Alters miRNAs Levels Involved in Non-Mendelian Inheritance of Autism Spectrum Disorder in Mice
Published on: July 11, 2025
The distribution of P-values in medical research articles suggested selective reporting associated with statistical
Thomas V Perneger1, Christophe Combescure1
1Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, and Geneva University Hospitals, 6 rue Gabrielle-Perret-Gentil, CH-1211 Geneva, Switzerland.
Objectives:
Published P-values provide a window into the global enterprise of medical research. The aim of this study was to use the distribution of published P-values to estimate the relative frequencies of null and alternative hypotheses and to seek irregularities suggestive of publication bias.
Study Design And Setting:
This cross-sectional study included P-values published in 120 medical research articles in 2016 (30 each from the BMJ, JAMA, Lancet, and New England Journal of Medicine). The observed distribution of P-values was compared with expected distributions under the null hypothesis (i.e., uniform between 0 and 1) and the alternative hypothesis (strictly decreasing from 0 to 1). P-values were categorized according to conventional levels of statistical significance and in one-percent intervals.
Results:
Among 4,158 recorded P-values, 26.1% were highly significant (P < 0.001), 9.1% were moderately significant (P ≥ 0.001 to < 0.01), 11.7% were weakly significant (P ≥ 0.01 to < 0.05), and 53.2% were nonsignificant (P ≥ 0.05). We noted three irregularities: (1) high proportion of P-values <0.001, especially in observational studies, (2) excess of P-values equal to 1, and (3) about twice as many P-values less than 0.05 compared with those more than 0.05. The latter finding was seen in both randomized trials and observational studies, and in most types of analyses, excepting heterogeneity tests and interaction tests. Under plausible assumptions, we estimate that about half of the tested hypotheses were null and the other half were alternative.
Conclusion:
This analysis suggests that statistical tests published in medical journals are not a random sample of null and alternative hypotheses but that selective reporting is prevalent. In particular, significant results are about twice as likely to be reported as nonsignificant results.
Related Concept Videos
01:52Regression Toward the Mean
01:37Statistical Significance
01:10P-value
P-value stands for the probability value. P-value is the probability that, if the null hypothesis is true, the results from another randomly selected sample will be as extreme or more extreme as the results obtained from the given sample.
A large P-value calculated from the data indicates to not reject the null hypothesis. But a higher P-value does not mean that the null hypothesis is true. The smaller the P-value, the more unlikely...
01:16Statistical Inference Techniques in Hypothesis Testing: Parametric Versus Nonparametric Data
Parametric statistics, as the name suggests, assumes that data follow a specific distribution, often a normal distribution. This assumption enables robust hypothesis testing and estimation. Parametric methods, like the Student's t-test or Goodness-of-fit test, are frequently employed in biostatistics due to their robustness. For instance, comparing...
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
01:16Bioequivalence Data: Statistical Interpretation