{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02358490566037736, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0015723270440251573, 'mean_word_length': 4.444444444444445, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Down with trends

INTRODUCTION The term “trend” has multiple definitions (1). In the medical literature, it can be used correctly when applied to a time course or a sequence of values. I argue here that it is often used in a confusing way and we would be well served if its meaning was limited to those situations where it is most appropriate. One such application uses the term to denote ‘general course, tendency or drift’. This is inappropriate when the data do not support such an inference. The word trend is increasingly applied when the p-value is within a range considered close to but does not achieve statistical significance.