The many roles of decision thresholds for primary research, evidence synthesis, and health decision-making

• Type: Article in International Scientific Journal
• Date: 2026

Authors

Schünemann, HJ (Author) Other; Sousa-Pinto, B (Author) FMUP; Schumacher, SG (Author) Other; McGowang, J (Author) Other; Tovey, D (Author) Other; Morgano, GP (Author) Other; Wiercioch, W (Author) Other; Chang, S (Author) Other; Neumann, I (Author) Other

Journal

Title: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Vol. 190

ISSN: 0895-4356

Publisher: Elsevier

Indexing

ISI Web of Knowledge - 0 Citations

Scopus - 0 Citations

Other information

Authenticus ID: P-01A-GAZ

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.112090

Abstract (EN): Background: A decision threshold (DT) reflects the point at which a decision or judgment changes, leading to the selection of an action or a commitment for one of several alternatives. Thresholds have always played a role in decision-making. Very small effects may achieve statistical significance yet remain not important to patients or the public. Judgments shift, for instance, from no or trivial effect to small, moderate, and large benefit with direct implications for decision-making. However, in guideline panels and other clinical or policy decisions, these thresholds are often applied subconsciously when interpreting effect estimates from studies and likely to vary across panel members. Study Design and Setting: In this commentary, inspired by the concepts leading to recent publications by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group and its members, we argue that the use of DTs has many advantages. Results: DTs are the basis for an interpretation of results that is not centered on statistical significance. In addition, DTs are useful for other aspects of evidence synthesis. The certainty of evidence ratings using the GRADE approach (https://book.gradepro.org/) are centered on DTs, including the determination of the target of the certainty rating, with advantages for transparency, objectivity, and simplicity. For example, judging imprecision is informed by DTs. Specifically, the number of DTs crossed by the plausible effect sizes, as indicated by its confidence interval, helps determine the degree of uncertainty assigned in a GRADE assessment of imprecision, including the number of levels of certainty a user rates down. DTs have also altered the way how users can transparently integrate bodies of evidence from both nonrandomized and randomized studies. Once determined, DTs can be used to validate automated judgments about the certainty of evidence. Beyond these developments, DTs can be useful for designing primary research. For example, sample size calculations could use standardized DTs for large effects when there are known harms that the intended benefits need to outweigh. Conclusions: DTs have many roles in interpretation, certainty assessments and research planning and design. (c) 2025 Published by Elsevier Inc.

Language: English

Type (Professor's evaluation): Scientific

No. of pages: 4