The P Value: What It Is and What It Is Not

The P value remains one of the most frequently reported statistical measures in biomedical literature, yet it is also one of the most widely misunderstood statistics. Introduced by Fisher as a measure of evidence against the null hypothesis, it was subsequently incorporated into the Neyman-Pearson decision framework, which emphasized long-run error rates and decision thresholds. Over the past decades, reliance on the conventional cut-off of P = 0.05 has fostered misconceptions, including the belief that the P value represents the probability that the null hypothesis is true or that statistical significance implies clinical importance. In this review, I examine the historical evolution of the P value, clarify the conceptual distinctions between evidential and decision-theoretic perspectives, and illustrate their implications through a case study. Common misinterpretations and the limitations of threshold-based inference are discussed, together with the consequences for reproducibility, statistical power, and interpretation of results. Recent recommendations from statistical associations and methodologists to move beyond dichotomous significance testing are highlighted. Complementary approaches, such as estimation of effect sizes with confidence intervals (CIs), likelihood ratios, and Bayesian inference, are briefly considered. I conclude that although the P value may provide useful information when properly interpreted, it should not be used as a sole criterion for inference. Transparent reporting of effect sizes, CIs, and contextual information offers a more reliable foundation for scientific interpretation and decision making.

• Publication year

  2025

• Venue

  Journal of Korean medical science

• Publication date

  2025-11-06

• Fields of study

  Medicine

• Identifiers
  DOI 10.3346/jkms.2025.40.e321PMID 41250654PMCID 12624209
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar, PubMed

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• On the effect of flexible adjustment of the p value significance threshold on the reproducibility of randomized clinical trials

  2025influential reference
• Reinterpretation of the results of randomized clinical trials

  2024cited by this paper
• On the use of receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to determine the most appropriate p value significance threshold

  2024cited by this paper
• Credibility of the P Value

  2024cited by this paper
• Statistical data presentation: a primer for rheumatology researchers

  2020cited by this paper
• Critical Values Robust to P-hacking

  2020influential reference
• The likelihood ratio and its graphical representation

  2019cited by this paper
• On reporting and interpreting statistical significance and p values in medical research

  2019cited by this paper
• Justify your alpha

  2018cited by this paper
• The Proposal to Lower P Value Thresholds to .005.

  2018cited by this paper
• Statistical Data Editing in Scientific Articles

  2017cited by this paper
• Abandon Statistical Significance

  2017cited by this paper
• Redefine statistical significance

  2017cited by this paper
• How to report the results of public health research

  2017cited by this paper
• The ASA Statement on p-Values: Context, Process, and Purpose

  2016cited by this paper
• Evolution of Reporting P Values in the Biomedical Literature, 1990-2015.

  2016cited by this paper
• The natural selection of bad science

  2016influential reference
• Statistical tests, P values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations

  2016cited by this paper
• Basic statistical reporting for articles published in biomedical journals: the "Statistical Analyses and Methods in the Published Literature" or the SAMPL Guidelines.

  2015cited by this paper
• Revised standards for statistical evidence

  2013influential reference
• Feeling the future: experimental evidence for anomalous retroactive influences on cognition and affect.

  2011cited by this paper
• Power Posing

  2010cited by this paper
• Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

  2005influential reference
• Confusion Over Measures of Evidence (p's) Versus Errors (α's) in Classical Statistical Testing

  2003cited by this paper
• Toward Evidence-Based Medical Statistics. 1: The P Value Fallacy

  1999cited by this paper
• Effect sizes and p values: what should be reported and what should be replicated?

  1996cited by this paper
• p values, hypothesis tests, and likelihood: implications for epidemiology of a neglected historical debate.

  1993cited by this paper
• Statistical Methods for Research Workers

  1937influential reference
• ON THE USE AND INTERPRETATION OF CERTAIN TEST CRITERIA FOR PURPOSES OF STATISTICAL INFERENCE PART I

  1928influential reference

• No citing papers are available for this paper.