Add new comment

I'm not an imager, and I couldn't work out from the paper how big the differences were between male and female. The authors show the differences are statistically significant, clearly. But are they large enough to be biologically significant? This study had a relatively large sample size. That can sometimes mean that quite small differences can emerge with statistical significance. I am not able to be sure if that is the case here.


Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Please note that researchers cannot give specific recommendations or advice about treatment; diagnosis and treatment are complex and highly individualized processes that require comprehensive face-to- face assessment. Please visit our "Ask an Expert" section to see a list of Q & A with NARSAD Grantees.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.