Re:South Africa suspends rollout of Oxford-AstraZeneca coron...
by Closi on Monday February 08, 2021 @07:25AM
(#26063557)
> we can’t say there is a statistically significant effectiveness
Agreed, although to clarify and be more precise, it also doesn't prove it's not effective. It effectively says that the sample was too small to tell anything.
> (it is not significantly different from 0% effectiveness).
This statement isn't true - it means that they are 95% sure the range of possible values is between -50 and +60, but it does not mean that the average of those two values is correct. 0% effectiveness is possible, but was not shown in this study.
Re:South Africa suspends rollout of Oxford-AstraZeneca coron...
by willj on Monday February 08, 2021 @07:54AM
(#26063792)
You’re right, semantics are everything. I left implicit the “in this study” part. As always, failing to reject the null doesn’t mean the null is true :)
Agreed, although to clarify and be more precise, it also doesn't prove it's not effective. It effectively says that the sample was too small to tell anything.
> (it is not significantly different from 0% effectiveness).
This statement isn't true - it means that they are 95% sure the range of possible values is between -50 and +60, but it does not mean that the average of those two values is correct. 0% effectiveness is possible, but was not shown in this study.