Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Feb;4(2):e26.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040026.

When should potentially false research findings be considered acceptable?

Affiliations

When should potentially false research findings be considered acceptable?

Benjamin Djulbegovic et al. PLoS Med. 2007 Feb.

Abstract

Ioannidis estimated that most published research findings are false, but he did not indicate when, if at all, potentially false research results may be considered as acceptable to society. We combined our two previously published models to calculate the probability above which research findings may become acceptable. A new model indicates that the probability above which research results should be accepted depends on the expected payback from the research (the benefits) and the inadvertent consequences (the harms). This probability may dramatically change depending on our willingness to tolerate error in accepting false research findings. Our acceptance of research findings changes as a function of what we call "acceptable regret," i.e., our tolerance of making a wrong decision in accepting the research hypothesis. We illustrate our findings by providing a new framework for early stopping rules in clinical research (i.e., when should we accept early findings from a clinical trial indicating the benefits as true?). Obtaining absolute "truth" in research is impossible, and so society has to decide when less-than-perfect results may become acceptable.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. The Threshold Probability Above (Pt in Red) Which We Should Accept Findings of Research Hypothesis as Being True
The horizontal yellow line indicates the actual conditional probability that the research hypothesis is true in the case of positive findings. This means that for benefit/harm ratios above the threshold (1.5 in this example), the research hypothesis can be accepted.
Figure 2
Figure 2. The Threshold Probability (Pt) Above Which We Should Accept Findings of Research Hypothesis as Being True (Pink Line) as a Function of Benefit/Harm Ratio
The calculated (acceptable regret) threshold above which we should accept research findings is shown for the worst-case scenario (B/H = 1.4; see text for details) with a (hypothetical) assumption that we are willing to forgo 30% of the benefits (slanted line). The calculated threshold probability (acceptable regret threshold) has a value of 58% when B/H = 1.4 (the horizontal line). This means that as long as the probability that research findings are true is above this acceptable regret threshold, these research findings could be accepted with tolerable amount of regret in case the research hypothesis proves to be wrong (for didactic purposes only one acceptable regret threshold is shown). See Box 2 and text for details.

References

    1. Ioannidis JP. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2005;2:e124. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Djulbegovic B, Hozo I, Schwartz A, McMasters K. Acceptable regret in medical decision making. Med Hypotheses. 1999;53:253–259. - PubMed
    1. Djulbegovic B, Hozo I. At what degree of belief in a research hypothesis is a trial in humans justified? J Eval Clin Practice. 2002;8:269–276. - PubMed
    1. Wacholoder S, Chanock S, Garcia-Closas M, El Ghormli L, Rothman N. Assessing the probability that a positive report is false: An approach for molecular epidemiology studies. J National Cancer Inst. 2004;96:432–442. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pauker S, Kassirer J. Therapeutic decision making: A cost benefit analysis. N Engl J Med. 1975;293:229–234. - PubMed

Publication types