Talk:Clinical significance

In my opinion, either the article needed to be retitled something like "clinical significance (psychology term)" (actually not that, but it typifies the issue) or it at least needed to make reference to the currency / non-technical acceptability of the useful (and widely used) broader concept. Linguistic conflation such as "practical clinical significance" occurs in everyday speech, although I fully understand that it may irk technically precise people. Pushing general usage toward the strict use of a the triad of "statistical, practical and clinical significances" would I fear run up against WP:WEIGHT (by unduly emphasizing one definition.) Furthermore, in the spirit of friendy wikipedianism, hopefully the edits actually make the previous message of the page clearer, and also more capable of subsequent expansion / inclusion of other potential usage / applications of "the term." Please contact me if you have concerns.FeatherPluma (talk) 22:50, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

No clinical significance of a measurement
This article seems to exclusively consider whether a proposed treatment is clinically signigicant, especially in mental issues. Now I have heard physicians call an abnormal lab result or EKG "not clinically significant". What do they mean by that? --  Solo Owl   02:25, 23 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eall Ân Ûle (talk • contribs)