Congenital coronary artery anomalies: diagnosable, premortem?

and the result is based on lack of significance (if our null hypothesis had been that there was no treatment effect in the lowest sextile, not being able to reject the null would probably be a low-power issue [Goldberger et al.’s power calculations are, in fact, based on this null hypothesis]—however, our null hypothesis was that the treatment effect would be the same in all sextiles, and we were able to reject this null hypothesis with an, admittedly marginal, significance of 0.05). Thus, while we would not disagree with Goldberger and colleagues’ caution “don’t believe it,” we might also caution “don’t disbelieve it.”