Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Decision Making: Traditional Method01:14

Decision Making: Traditional Method

4.1K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the traditional method includes calculating the critical value, testing the value of the test statistic using the sample data, and interpreting these values.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
4.1K
Decision Making: P-value Method01:09

Decision Making: P-value Method

5.5K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim  is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses:  a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...
5.5K
Statistical Hypothesis Testing01:16

Statistical Hypothesis Testing

2.0K
Hypothesis testing is a critical statistical procedure facilitating informed, evidence-based decisions. It begins with a hypothesis, which is a tentative explanation, or a prediction about a population parameter. This hypothesis can be either a null hypothesis (H0), indicating no effect or difference, or an alternative hypothesis (Ha), suggesting an effect or difference.
Statistical significance measures the probability that an observed result occurred by chance. If this probability, known as...
2.0K
Types of Hypothesis Testing01:11

Types of Hypothesis Testing

26.6K
There are three types of hypothesis tests: right-tailed, left-tailed, and two-tailed.
When the null and alternative hypotheses are stated, it is observed that the null hypothesis is a neutral statement against which the alternative hypothesis is tested. The alternative hypothesis is a claim that instead has a certain direction. If the null hypothesis claims that p = 0.5, the alternative hypothesis would be an opposing statement to this and can be put either p > 0.5, p < 0.5, or p...
26.6K
Critical Region, Critical Values and Significance Level01:16

Critical Region, Critical Values and Significance Level

12.0K
The critical region, critical value, and significance level are interdependent concepts crucial in hypothesis testing.
In hypothesis testing, a sample statistic is converted to a test statistic using z, t, or chi-square distribution. A critical region is an area under the curve in  probability distributions demarcated by the critical value. When the test statistic falls in this region, it suggests that the null hypothesis must be rejected. As this region contains all those values of the...
12.0K
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing01:13

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

232
Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...
232

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Evaluation of the 4Kscore in EPIC: Letter.

Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology·2026
Same author

Patient Engagement With an Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes Tool Evaluating Hospital Discharge Readiness After Cancer Surgery.

JCO oncology practice·2026
Same author

Comparison of different long-term cardiovascular disease risk prediction horizons to guide preventive drug treatment in apparently healthy individuals.

European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes·2026
Same author

Diagnostic and prognostic utility of PSMA-PET/CT in node-metastatic prostate cancer.

BJU international·2026
Same author

Evaluating the Impact of Age on Prostate Cancer Overdiagnosis Using Long-Term Follow-Up From the CAP Randomised Trial.

International journal of cancer·2026
Same author

Performance of the Dutch Triage standard in managing fever in children in out-of-hours primary care: a secondary analysis of the chili study.

Family practice·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 27, 2025

Operant Protocols for Assessing the Cost-benefit Analysis During Reinforced Decision Making by Rodents
07:05

Operant Protocols for Assessing the Cost-benefit Analysis During Reinforced Decision Making by Rodents

Published on: September 10, 2018

6.0K

Decision curve analysis: confidence intervals and hypothesis testing for net benefit.

Andrew J Vickers1, Ben Van Claster2,3,4, Laure Wynants2,4,5

  • 1Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. vickersa@mskcc.org.

Diagnostic and Prognostic Research
|June 5, 2023
PubMed
Summary

Decision curve analysis should not rely on traditional p values or confidence intervals. Instead, focus on expected utility and the value of further research for informed decision-making.

More Related Videos

Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods
13:04

Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods

Published on: September 19, 2012

12.1K
An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.1K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 27, 2025

Operant Protocols for Assessing the Cost-benefit Analysis During Reinforced Decision Making by Rodents
07:05

Operant Protocols for Assessing the Cost-benefit Analysis During Reinforced Decision Making by Rodents

Published on: September 10, 2018

6.0K
Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods
13:04

Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods

Published on: September 19, 2012

12.1K
An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.1K

Area of Science:

  • Decision Analysis
  • Biostatistics
  • Health Economics

Background:

  • Recent studies propose methods for confidence intervals and p values in decision curve analysis (DCA).
  • The rationale behind these statistical approaches in DCA is often unclear.
  • This study examines the interplay between sampling variability, statistical inference, and decision-analytic principles.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To assess the relationship between sampling variability, inference, and decision-analytic concepts in the context of net benefit.
  • To clarify the appropriate use of statistical inference within decision analysis frameworks.
  • To provide guidance on evaluating prediction model utility beyond traditional statistical significance.

Main Methods:

  • Review of the fundamental theory of decision analysis and expected utility.
  • Conceptual analysis of the application of statistical inference to net benefit calculations.
  • Exploration of alternative methods for assessing uncertainty in decision-analytic contexts.

Main Results:

  • Decision-making should prioritize maximizing expected utility, independent of p values or statistical uncertainty.
  • Applying traditional statistical inference to net benefit can be detrimental, altering criteria for model value.
  • Uncertainty in net benefit due to sampling variation should be framed as the value of further research.

Conclusions:

  • Null hypothesis testing and simple confidence intervals have limited value in decision curve analysis.
  • Alternative approaches like value of information analysis are more appropriate for assessing uncertainty.
  • Methods to evaluate the probability of benefit should be prioritized over traditional statistical significance.