Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 16, 2026

Establishment of Rat Models Mimicking Gender-affirming Hormone Therapies
Published on: January 10, 2025
Beyond "non-significant" results: Why and how to test for practical equivalence
Jakub Tomek1, Aaron Caldwell2, David A Eisner3
1Department of Anatomy, Physiology, and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PT, United Kingdom.
Abstract:
Reporting comparisons with P ≥ 0.05 as showing "no effect" or "no difference" remains one of the most widespread and problematic misinterpretations in the scientific literature. A statistically nonsignificant result shows only that the data do not provide strong evidence for a difference. This distinction matters because such findings can arise for two very different reasons: Either there is no meaningful difference, or a meaningful difference is present but cannot be detected reliably because of limited sample size or high variability. We highlight equivalence testing as a practical framework for distinguishing between these possibilities. Using the two one-sided tests (TOST) approach, investigators can formally test whether effects large enough to be scientifically, clinically, or practically meaningful can be ruled out. We explain the logic of TOST, show how it distinguishes practical equivalence from inconclusive evidence, and illustrate its use in paired and unpaired comparisons. To support broader adoption, we also introduce a freely available online calculator that enables researchers to perform common equivalence tests without coding.
Related Concept Videos
Bioequivalence Data: Statistical Interpretation
Bioequivalence of Drugs: Drugs with Multiple Indications
Significance Testing: Overview
Comparing Experimental Results: Student's t-Test
Equivalence: In Vitro and In Vivo Bioequivalence
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs

