I often see research papers reporting lower or upper bounds. E.g.:

Patients treated with the splint regained mobility significantly more quickly (p less than 0.001) and preferred the splint to the plaster cast. The range of dorsiflexion at the ankle improved more rapidly after treatment in the splint (p less than 0.001), and patients were able to return to normal activities sooner.

What are the advantages of doing so instead of reporting the actual value (rounded if necessary)?



Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.