Inclusion of Effect Size Measures and Clinical Relevance in Research Papers.

BACKGROUND: There are multiple issues that arise when researchers focus on and only report "statistical significance" of study findings. An important element that is often not included in reports is a discussion of clinical relevance. OBJECTIVES: The authors address issues related to significance, the use of effect sizes, confidence or credible intervals, and the inclusion of clinical relevance in reports of research findings. METHODS: Measures of magnitude, precision, and relevance such as effect sizes, confidence intervals (CIs), and clinically relevant effects are described in detail. In addition, recommendations for reporting and evaluating effect sizes and CIs are included. Example scenarios are presented to illustrate the interplay of statistical significance and clinical relevance. RESULTS: There are several issues that may arise when significance is the focus of clinical research reporting. One issue is the lack of attention to nonsignificant findings in published works although findings show clinical relevance. Another issue is that significance is interpreted as clinical relevance. As well, clinically relevant results from small-sample studies are often not considered for publication, and thus, findings might not be available for meta-analysis. DISCUSSION: Findings in research reports should address effect sizes and clinical relevance and significance. Failure to publish clinically relevant effects and CIs may preclude the inclusion of clinically relevant studies in systematic reviews and meta-analyses, thereby limiting the advancement of evidence-based practice. Several accessible resources for researchers to generate, report, and evaluate measures of magnitude, precision, and relevance are included in this article.

Household disorder and blood pressure in mother-child dyads: A brief report.

High blood pressure (BP) is the leading risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Although factors outside the home, such as crime and noise, have been associated with high BP in women and children, it is unknown if disorder within the home (household disorder) influences BP. We tested the hypothesis that women and children with more household disorder would have higher BP, independent of age, race, sodium intake, and body mass index (BMI). This study was a secondary analysis of data from mother-child dyads (n = 216). Mothers were 87% African American, 34 ± 5 years old, with BMI 33.59 ± 9.43 kg/m². Children were 7 ± 2 (range: 4-10) years of age with BMI z score 0.60 ± 2.07. Household disorder was measured by the Confusion Hubbub and Order Scale. Mother-child dyads were assessed for weight, height, BP (adults), BP percentile (children), energy intake, and sodium intake. The relationship between household disorder and BP was evaluated using Pearson's partial correlation coefficients. In fully adjusted models, household disorder was positively associated with systolic BP for mothers (r = 0.15, p < .05) and tended to be positively associated with diastolic BP (r = 0.11, p = .10). For the children, household disorder was not associated with systolic or diastolic BP percentile. This study's results suggest that household disorder is positively associated with higher BP in adult women, but not their children. Nevertheless, these data suggest that interventions to address household disorder could benefit maternal BP and potentially improve long-term CVD outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).