The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Making Meaningful Inferences About Magnitudes
Open accessAbstract
A study of a sample provides only an estimate of the true (population) value of an outcome statistic. A report of the study therefore usually includes an inference about the true value. Traditionally, a researcher makes an inference by declaring the value of the statistic statistically significant or non significant on the basis of a P value derived from a null-hypothesis test. This approach is confusing and can be misleading, depending on the magnitude of the statistic, error of measurement, and sample size. The authors use a more intuitive and practical approach based directly on uncertainty in the true value of the statistic. First they express the uncertainty as confidence limits, which define the likely range of the true value. They then deal with the real-world relevance of this uncertainty by taking into account values of the statistic that are substantial in some positive and negative sense, such as beneficial or harmful. If the likely range overlaps substantially positive and negative values, they infer that the outcome is unclear; otherwise, they infer that the true value has the magnitude of the observed value: substantially positive, trivial, or substantially negative. They refine this crude inference by stating qualitatively the likelihood that the true value will have the observed magnitude (eg, very likely beneficial). Quantitative or qualitative probabilities that the true value has the other 2 magnitudes or more finely graded magnitudes (such as trivial, small, moderate, and large) can also be estimated to guide a decision about the utility of the outcome.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cohen, J. (1994) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.49.12.997 · Cited by 4,003
Sterne, J. A. C. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.322.7280.226 · Cited by 1,466
Effects of Ingestion of Bicarbonate, Citrate, Lactate, and Chloride on Sprint Running
VAN MONTFOORT, M. C. E., VAN DIEREN, L., HOPKINS, W. G., & SHEARMAN, J. P. (2004) · Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · doi:10.1249/01.mss.0000132378.73975.25 · Cited by 121
Self-citation
Cited by
Progressive Statistics for Studies in Sports Medicine and Exercise Science
HOPKINS, W. G., MARSHALL, S. W., BATTERHAM, A. M., & HANIN, J. (2009) · Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · doi:10.1249/mss.0b013e31818cb278 · Cited by 9,128
Self-citationSnowling, N. J., & Hopkins, W. G. (2006) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc06-1317 · Cited by 813
Self-citationCaffeine and sports performance
Burke, L. M. (2008) · Applied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism · doi:10.1139/h08-130 · Cited by 442
Pataky, T. C., Vanrenterghem, J., & Robinson, M. A. (2015) · Journal of Biomechanics · doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.02.051 · Cited by 385
Monitoring Fatigue Status in Elite Team-Sport Athletes: Implications for Practice
Thorpe, R. T., Atkinson, G., Drust, B., & Gregson, W. (2017) · International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance · doi:10.1123/ijspp.2016-0434 · Cited by 328
Metadata
- Authors
- Batterham, A. M., & Hopkins, W. G.
- Venue
- International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
- Publisher
- Human Kinetics
- Published
- 2006-03
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 50-57
- ISSN
- 1555-0265 (ISSN-L)
- 1555-0273
- OpenAlex
- W2161520320
- Cited by
- 2,183
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 39.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.