# Proofs of Nulls: P \> 0.05

**URL:** <https://discourse.datamethods.org/t/proofs-of-nulls-p-0-05/1243>\
**Category:** study interpretation\
**Tags:** interpretation\
**Created:** [January 15, 2019, 11:50pm UTC](https://discourse.datamethods.org/t/proofs-of-nulls-p-0-05/1243 "2019-01-15T23:50:59Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Raj](https://discourse.datamethods.org/user_avatar/discourse.datamethods.org/raj/32/169_2.png) [@Raj](https://discourse.datamethods.org/u/Raj)\
**Post date:** [January 16, 2019, 12:33am UTC](https://discourse.datamethods.org/t/proofs-of-nulls-p-0-05/1243/2 "2019-01-16T00:33:54Z")

</div>

As a medical educator, I have an interest in improving how we teach interpretation of study results to medical students, residents, and fellow physicians.

To that extent, I have found widespread issues in many of our popular EBM textbooks when looking at results with p\>0.05. I have discussed this on another post here: [Errors in teaching appraisal of null results](https://discourse.datamethods.org/t/errors-in-teaching-critical-appraisal-of-null-results-p-0-05-to-clinicians/741?u=raj)

Certainly, if an EBM textbook written by medical experts is making mistakes like this, it’s no wonder lay physicians like myself have similar issues.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.datamethods.org/t/proofs-of-nulls-p-0-05/1243)._