On 2015 May 15, Kausik Datta commented:

"P value of <0.1 was set as a meaningful difference with statistical significance."

I am curious, how exactly was the acceptable P-value set at a non-traditional, less robust/discriminatory value? How was this considered 'meaningful', based on... which consideration(s)? Did the peer reviewers for this article raise this question to the authors, and if so, what was the authors' response?

(Caveat: I don't have access to the full paper and, therefore, don't know if these questions have been answered in the discussion.)

On 2015 May 15, Kausik Datta commented:

"P value of <0.1 was set as a meaningful difference with statistical significance."

I am curious, how exactly was the acceptable P-value set at a non-traditional, less robust/discriminatory value? How was this considered 'meaningful', based on... which consideration(s)? Did the peer reviewers for this article raise this question to the authors, and if so, what was the authors' response?

(Caveat: I don't have access to the full paper and, therefore, don't know if these questions have been answered in the discussion.)