• CrateDane
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    170 is a fairly substantial sample size, but it does pose challenges with data interpretation when there’s no intervention and the expected effect size is small.

    Life sciences often uses much smaller sample sizes, but with intervention.

    At the absolute minimum, the headline here should be “found no evidence of” rather than “do not”. The good old absence of evidence vs. evidence of absence thing.