Figure 6 - uploaded by Sergey Roussakow
Content may be subject to copyright.
An example of the misconception of 2 × 2 tables: [26] I, original tables; II, corrected gross tables; III, corrected contingency tables. LC, Lung Cancer; NLC, No Lung Cancer; SM, Smoker, NSM, NonSmoker.

An example of the misconception of 2 × 2 tables: [26] I, original tables; II, corrected gross tables; III, corrected contingency tables. LC, Lung Cancer; NLC, No Lung Cancer; SM, Smoker, NSM, NonSmoker.

Source publication
Preprint
Full-text available
Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is in crisis, in part due to bad methods, which are understood as misuse of statistics that is considered correct in itself. This article exposes two related common misconceptions in statistics, the effect size (ES) based on correlation (CBES) and a misconception of contingency tables (MCT). CBES is a fallacy based on...

Contexts in source publication

Context 1
... example of the consequences of these misconceptions is shown in Figure 6. Section I presents example CTs (Table 1-3) taken from a credible source. ...
Context 2
... 5. Significance and association error due to misconception of contingency tables ( Figure 3II). The example in Figure 6 shows that the MCT is threatening, because much of the findings obtained from CTs can be misleading. The misconception is widespread: the idea of CT is typically explained using GCTs; [11,26,35] BCTs are misleadingly referred to as CTs; [17,26] CTs are often (mostly?) ...