Why rehabilitation research does not work (As well as we think it should)

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

40 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Establishing treatment effectiveness is a high priority for rehabilitation research. The use of traditional quantitative null hypotheses to achieve this priority is reviewed. Three problems are identified in the analysis and interpretation of investigations based on statistical testing of hypotheses: (1) confusion of clinical and statistical significance, (2) low statistical power in detecting clinically important results, and (3) a failure to understand the importance of replication in developing a knowledge base for rehabilitation practice. Technical aspects associated with each problem are reviewed and examples presented illustrating the impact of low statistical power and the results of misinterpreting statistical significance tests. Several specific recommendations are made to improve the clinical usefulness of quantitative research conducted in rehabilitation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)123-129
Number of pages7
JournalArchives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume76
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 1995
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Rehabilitation
Knowledge Bases
Research
Rehabilitation Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Rehabilitation
  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

Cite this

Why rehabilitation research does not work (As well as we think it should). / Ottenbacher, Kenneth.

In: Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Vol. 76, No. 2, 1995, p. 123-129.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2312c000141b4e86b3a2c64f6fca8ab9,
title = "Why rehabilitation research does not work (As well as we think it should)",
abstract = "Establishing treatment effectiveness is a high priority for rehabilitation research. The use of traditional quantitative null hypotheses to achieve this priority is reviewed. Three problems are identified in the analysis and interpretation of investigations based on statistical testing of hypotheses: (1) confusion of clinical and statistical significance, (2) low statistical power in detecting clinically important results, and (3) a failure to understand the importance of replication in developing a knowledge base for rehabilitation practice. Technical aspects associated with each problem are reviewed and examples presented illustrating the impact of low statistical power and the results of misinterpreting statistical significance tests. Several specific recommendations are made to improve the clinical usefulness of quantitative research conducted in rehabilitation.",
author = "Kenneth Ottenbacher",
year = "1995",
doi = "10.1016/S0003-9993(95)80021-2",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "76",
pages = "123--129",
journal = "Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation",
issn = "0003-9993",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Why rehabilitation research does not work (As well as we think it should)

AU - Ottenbacher, Kenneth

PY - 1995

Y1 - 1995

N2 - Establishing treatment effectiveness is a high priority for rehabilitation research. The use of traditional quantitative null hypotheses to achieve this priority is reviewed. Three problems are identified in the analysis and interpretation of investigations based on statistical testing of hypotheses: (1) confusion of clinical and statistical significance, (2) low statistical power in detecting clinically important results, and (3) a failure to understand the importance of replication in developing a knowledge base for rehabilitation practice. Technical aspects associated with each problem are reviewed and examples presented illustrating the impact of low statistical power and the results of misinterpreting statistical significance tests. Several specific recommendations are made to improve the clinical usefulness of quantitative research conducted in rehabilitation.

AB - Establishing treatment effectiveness is a high priority for rehabilitation research. The use of traditional quantitative null hypotheses to achieve this priority is reviewed. Three problems are identified in the analysis and interpretation of investigations based on statistical testing of hypotheses: (1) confusion of clinical and statistical significance, (2) low statistical power in detecting clinically important results, and (3) a failure to understand the importance of replication in developing a knowledge base for rehabilitation practice. Technical aspects associated with each problem are reviewed and examples presented illustrating the impact of low statistical power and the results of misinterpreting statistical significance tests. Several specific recommendations are made to improve the clinical usefulness of quantitative research conducted in rehabilitation.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028815789&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028815789&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0003-9993(95)80021-2

DO - 10.1016/S0003-9993(95)80021-2

M3 - Article

VL - 76

SP - 123

EP - 129

JO - Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

JF - Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

SN - 0003-9993

IS - 2

ER -