The Claim
The randomized controlled trial had sufficient statistical power (>90%) to detect a clinically meaningful difference of 2.0 points on the 11-point Numeric Rating Scale pain scale between active TENS and sham TENS groups, indicating that the observed null result was not attributable to inadequate sample size.
What the research says
Challenges is higher
Challenge is ahead, but a single strong supporting study can change this.
These are independent scores, not a percentage. Higher-grade studies count more, so a single strong opposing study can outweigh several weaker ones.
This study was big enough to detect a real difference in pain if one existed - it had over 90% power to find even a small 2-point improvement on the pain scale between real TENS and fake TENS treatment, so the finding of no difference isn't just because there weren't enough patients.
See the scientific wording
The study was adequately powered (>90% power) to detect a clinically meaningful difference of 2.0 points on the 11-point NRS pain scale between active and sham TENS groups, suggesting the null finding is not due to insufficient sample size
What the research says
1 studyThe claim says the study had enough patients to detect a real difference (over 90% power), so the finding of no difference between TENS and sham treatment isn't just because there weren't enough people. But the study abstract doesn't mention anything about power calculations, so we can't verify this claim.
Score breakdown, mechanism chain, raw evidence, ideal studies needed & 1 supporting studies
Not medical advice. For informational purposes only. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional before making health decisions.