Stats >> WebLog (Started on
February 3, 2004)
This weblog is a collection of materials that I find interesting and
useful. I hope you find these entries useful as well. The dates listed on the
weblog are the dates when the original entry was written. I will make some
minor editorial changes from time to time, but I'll note any major changes
with a revision date. Some of these entries are incomplete because I was
interrupted while writing them. I try to finish them up within the next day
or so, but once in a while a weblog entry stays unfinished for some time.
Please be patient, as I can only work on these web pages during quiet times
at work.
Archive
Archive arranged by topic
The last ten weblog entries
- Stats: Bootstrap estimates of the
standard error (June 20, 2008). A regular correspondent (JU) on the
MEDSTATS email discussion group asked about using the bootstrap to estimate
the standard error of the mean in a simple case with 9 data values. He wanted
to know why the commonly used approach in the bootstrap community was to use n
instead of n-1 in the variance denominator. It seemed to him that n-1 would
produce an unbiased estimate of the standard error and wanted to know if that
was true just in this special case or true in general. He quoted from the book
by Efron and Tibshirani that they felt that for most purposes either method
would work well.
- Stats: Running R on a web server (June 17,
2008). I'm working on a project for planning and monitoring accrual
patterns in clinical trials. This will eventually lead, I hope, to a grant to
support this work. I have some existing R scripts and want to examine the
possibility of running those scripts on a web page.
- Stats: Can I run a quantitative analysis on this
data? (June 17, 2008). I get lots of questions about how small a sample
size can be before you can't perform a quantitative analysis and instead are
forced to summarize the data in a qualitative fashion. The most recent
question involved looking at infants with feeding disorders. There were 29 of
these infants, but a subgroup of 5 had disorders so severe that they still
required a feeding tube at 3 years of age. The researcher wanted to compare
this group of 5 to the remaining 24.
- Stats: Criticism of random effects in a
meta-analysis (June 14, 2008). There are two approaches to combining
results in a meta-analysis. They are called the fixed effects model and the
random effects model. The fixed effects model effectively weights each study
by the sample size, or by a measurement that is closely related to the sample
size, such as the inverse of the standard error of the estimate. A random
effects meta-analysis, in contrast, will assume that an estimate from a single
study has two sources of error. One error is the same as in the fixed effects
analysis and varies by the sample size of the study. The other error is a
random component that is independent of the sample size and represents
uncertainties due to conditions in this particular study that differ from
conditions in other studies.
- Stats: Modeling a declining count variable
(June 14, 2008). I've been working on an interesting project that requires
Poisson regression. A company sends out a mailing and gets a certain number of
telephone calls back on each of the days following. The number of phone calls
is typically (but not always) highest on the first day afterwards and declines
rapidly on successive days. I wanted to develop a simple Poisson regression
model for this data.
- Stats: Eliciting a prior distribution for
rejection/refusal rates (June 7, 2008). I got a question about the
Bayesian model for rejection/refusal rates. I had used three prior
distributions in my calculations, a Beta(10,40), a Beta(45,5), and a
Beta(25,25). The question was, how did I select those prior distributions.
- Stats: When does heterogeneity
become a concern? (June 5, 2008). Dear Professor Mean, I have an ANOVA
model and I am worried about heterogeneity--unequal standard deviations in
each group. How should I check for this?
- Stats: How wide can you make a line of your web
page? (May 27, 2008). When you are writing a web page, you do not have
much control over how it is displayed at a remote site. If you really wanted
this level of control, you should use a more rigid format, such as Adobe PDF
files. But there are some serious advantages to the reader to let him/her
control the display of a web page. As a web author, you should strive to make
your web pages look good under a reasonable set of alternatives, such as
differing screen sizes or differing font sizes.
- Stats: A simple Bayesian model for
exponential accrual times (May 26, 2008). Here is a simple Bayesian model
for exponential accrual times. This model will help researchers to plan the
estimated duration of a clinical trial. The same model will also allow the
researcher to monitor the accrual during the trial itself and develop revised
estimates for the duration or the sample size.
- Stats: A short biography that can be used
as an introduction (May 9, 2008). I'm giving a talk today, and I was asked
to provide some material that could be used to introduce me.
The last ten interesting
articles, interesting books, or
interesting websites.
- Email Address Munger/Email
Address Encoder Excerpt: Email address munging is the act of using
ASCII, JavaScript, and scrambling of letters in your email address in order to
hide your email address from spam bots, spiders, and spoofers. Our anti junk
email tool protects your email address and helps prevent spam by avoiding spam
bots and email address harvesters. This tool allows you to munge and mask your
email address by using ASCII, JavaScript, and/or image links.
- The role of clinical
uncertainty in treatment decisions for diabetic patients with uncontrolled
blood pressure. Description: This article examines the process of care
for diabetic patients with elevated blood pressure. Clinicians frequently did
not intensify the therapy, mostly because of uncertainty about what the true
blood pressure would be.
- The "3T's" road map to
transform US health care: the "how" of high-quality care. Description:
This article outlines the three major translational steps needed to apply
research to actual clinical care.
- How much loss to
follow-up is acceptable in long-term randomised trials and prospective
studies?. Description: This article reviews current literature
recommendations on how low a drop-out should be in order to be acceptable. The
general consensus is that 5% or less is good and that 20% or higher is bad
(though some authors will say that 50% or more is bad). The authors point out
that the statistical consequences of drop-outs vary from study to study and
that rigid adherence to any fixed cut-off is inappropriate.
- If we're so different,
why do we keep overlapping? When 1 plus 1 doesn't make 2. Description:
This article provides a simple explanation why two overlapping confidence
intervals is not t he same as showing that the two means are not statistically
different from one another.
- How to interpret figures
in reports of clinical trials. Description: This article reviews
several commonly used data display methods and explains what a non-technical
reader should look for.
- What constitutes a
"clinical trial"?: A survey of oncology professionals. Description:
This article summarizes ths opinions of 66 oncology researchers on what
constitutes a clinical trial. While the original responses were broadly
inclusive, the responses became less inclusive when definitions of the Cancer
Care Ontario and the Ontario Cancer Research Network groups were provided.
- Pediatric Drug Studies
Seen as Obligation of Other Parents' Kids Description: This webpage
summarizes the research of Davis and Matthew Davis, who surveyed parents about
medical research in children. While most parents wanted to see research that
insured safe medicines for children, most would not agree to let their own
children participate in research studies.
- Overconfidence as a
Cause of Diagnostic Error in Medicine. Description: This article
proposes that a common source of misdiagnosis errors occur because of
overconfidence and suggests strategies for reducing these types of errors.
- Missed and delayed
diagnoses in the ambulatory setting. Description: This letter to the
editor criticizes the use of malpractice claims to identify misdiagnosis
rates.
- GRADE working group
Excerpt: The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and
Evaluation (short GRADE) Working Group began in the year 2000 as an informal
collaboration of people with an interest in addressing the shortcomings of
present grading systems in health care. The working group has developed a
common, sensible and transparent approach to grading quality of evidence and
strength of recommendations. Many international organizations have provided
input into the development of the approach and have started using it.