Readers and especially reviewers need to looking at effect sizes. Not just "was the p value under 0.05 so there is some effect". What a nothingburger. Let's br

Readers and especially reviewers need to looking at effect sizes. Not just "was the p value under 0.05 so there is some effect". What a nothingburger. Let's break it down. > Breakfast skipping was correlated with BMI (Wald, 5.481, 95% CI, 0.154-0.847, P-value, 0.019). What that means is that breakfast skipping was correlated with somewhere between no BMI points and 1. We have no way of knowing which from this study. Basically, maybe your BMI goes up a little, but so little as to be irrelevant. > A positive direct correlation was evident between late dinner intake, BMI, and HbA1c (Wald, 4.210, 95% CI, 0.743-0.993, P-value, 0.04 for HbA1c, and Wald, 6.777, 95% CI, 1.0221-1.165, P-value, 0.009 for BMI). Maybe eating dinner late increases your BMI by 1 point or so. This is probably the same point they claim you gain from eating breakfast late. The A1c numbers are so close to being statistically insignificant that we can just ignore them. And that's before you add all of the other problems with the study. This study shows nothing. Yet another questionnaire based study about nutrition. I wish we could as a scientific community just ban this garbage.