Curry spice turmeric boosts memory by nearly 30%, eases depression, study finds

Re:Curry spice turmeric boosts memory by nearly 30%, eases d... by dumbneurologist on Thursday January 25, 2018 @05:29AM (#16229992)

agree that replication is important and that it's too early to believe fully, but when a study size is small and you still find a difference, then it implies the effect size is large.

If you meet statistical significance, then diminishing n means increasing clinical significance.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Curry spice turmeric boosts memory by nearly 30%, eases d... by pbhjpbhj on Thursday January 25, 2018 @10:15AM (#16231296)

I flipped 5 coins, 4 came up heads, so heads must be >>80% likelihood??

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Curry spice turmeric boosts memory by nearly 30%, eases d... by klmr on Thursday January 25, 2018 @06:27AM (#16230175)

> but when a study size is small and you still find a difference, then it implies the effect size is large

That’s only true if it holds across multiple studies. Otherwise it might simply be random variability. By your argument, a study with n=4 that showed an effect would imply a huge effect size. No. It implies that the measured signal is highly variable, and that you got lucky on 1:3 odds. Check out regression towards the mean [1].

(Note that if you’ve got a good underlying model of the variability, n=4 can work. In fact, it’s routinely done in specific applications, such as transcriptomics. But even there it’s far from ideal, and it’s supported by a stringent error model.)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regression_toward_the_mean

[ Parent | on HN ]