1. Presenting clear, concise statistical information: figures, tables, and text Reid D. Landes Department of Biostatistics University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences

2. Figure For rivers with Type B embankments, overflow volume was 1.9-fold [95% CI (1.02, 3.11)] that of control at the second time point in the rainy season, but was not different from control at the start of the rainy season. Overflow on rivers with Type A embankments did not differ from controls at either time point. Overflow on creeks with either Type A or B embankments was not statistically different from that with control embankments at either time point. * Fig 2

3. Figure: Final Caption. Observed (unfilled) and mean (filled) overflow rates relative to control’s mean. Error bars are 95% CI for fold change from control embankments at indicated time point of rainy season. Fig 16

4. Figure Pointers Use figures when patterns are important, and actual values not so much. If presenting data from categorical groups (having no natural order), consider ordering by increasing magnitude. If you have two quantitative factors (e.g., dose and time), consider which comparisons are more important. Profile by the lesser important one. E.g., if comparisons among doses are important, then time is the horizontal axis, and each dose gets its own time profile. Fig 17

5. Table Sample Size 1005001000 Prob. Dist. 1QuMed3Qu1QuMed3Qu1QuMed3Qu TE-combined0.350.721.080.560.700.850.600.700.80 TE-only0.340.681.020.540.680.820.580.680.78 PE=50% PE-combined13.3239.0374.5637.2049.9367.5641.1450.5461.84 PE-only13.1041.0181.0138.1051.9070.8242.2552.3964.44 TE-combined0.160.510.850.390.520.660.430.530.62 TE-only0.160.500.820.380.520.650.430.520.61 PE=33% PE-combined-8.8920.4556.9620.2633.6151.2923.7333.8344.96 PE-only-8.9620.6059.1520.3634.0152.3223.9034.1745.70 TE-combined0.010.380.710.250.390.530.290.390.49 TE-only0.000.380.700.250.390.530.290.390.49 PE=11% PE-combined-28.583.4837.60-8.689.5229.36-1.4410.7924.23 PE-only-28.993.4038.14-8.749.4629.44-1.4410.8224.33 Tab 2

6. Table: Description in Results Table 1 shows that in comparison to smaller true PE (e.g., PE=11%), when true PE is large (e.g., PE=50%), the difference between the PE-only method and PE- combined method increases. In addition, the variability of PE-only is larger than that of PE- combined based on the 1 st quantile and the 3 rd quantile in Table 1, when true PE increases. Tab 2

7. Updated S-Table: Final True PE (%) MedianInter-Quartile Range PE-onlyPE-combined PE-only / PE-combinedPE-onlyPE-combined PE-only / PE-combined 1110.8 1.0025.825.71.00 3334.233.81.0121.821.21.03 5052.450.51.0422.220.71.07 Tab 27 Caption. For low, medium, and high values of true PE, estimated medians and inter- quartile ranges of PE when using the PE-only and PE-combined methods of estimation.

8. Table pointers Use tables when actual values are important. Try not to duplicate statistical values in table and text. Idea. Present confidence intervals in a table and p-values in a text. Think about significant digits, and how many are really needed Within a column of values with decimals, align the decimals. Comparisons are better visually made reading Up  down compared to left  right Low  high compared to high  low Tab 28

9. More table pointers If a column (row) has the same value in every position, that column (row) is not needed.  Usually a problem in protocols and grant applications; not in final manuscripts. A column (row) of p-values? You don’t need a leading zero. Rows (columns) headings have no particular order? Consider arranging by a statistical quantity Idea. by decreasing point estimate, which is usually by increasing p-value Tab 29

10. Text The t-test examining the effects of condition revealed a significant difference (t[98]= 2.67, p<0.05) between experimental (mean = 1.55, SD=2.40) and control (mean = 0.85, SD=2.17) conditions. Txt 3

11. Updated Text: Final The experimental condition’s mean of 1.55 was statistically greater than the control’s by 0.7 [95% CI: (0.19, 1.28), t[98]= 2.67, p=.009]. Txt 15

12. Text pointers When using comparative words (e.g., smaller, greater, different), make sure the comparator and comparative are clear. “A and B were different; C was, too.” -- Ugh. “A was smaller than B; and C was smaller, too.” – Almost. “A was smaller than B; and C was smaller than A.” – Good. In most cases, a p-value comes from a test statistic. Give that test statistic along with the p-value. (t 38 = 2.39, p=.022) (F (2,38) = 3.23, p=.051)  2 3 = 5.16, p=.160  Txt 16

13. More text pointers Use as little statistical jargon as possible. Let inferential values do the stat talking. “A was smaller than B by 8.2 g [95%CI: (0.6, 17.9)]; and C was smaller than A by 3.1 g, but not statistically so [95%CI: (-2.4, 8.6)]. Finally, C was smaller than B by 11.3 g [95%CI: (6.4, 16.2)]. ” Txt 17

14. Final Pointers Focus on the main point Cut clutter Use relevant quantities Good figures take time, a lot of time. So do good tables. A good figure with its caption should stand alone. Same for a table. Ask a fresh set of eyes to look at it, and tell you the story. Say as little as possible while your friend is looking at it. Final 1