Skip to content

🎓 💄 Topic comparing --- Improve content  #200

@jameshughes89

Description

@jameshughes89

What

Dumping some feedback I got from a statistician colleague.

  • In your example of the drug trial, I would qualify the recovery time, although an observation, as a random variable too, as it is a property or characteristic of interest that you want to understand.

  • In your drug trial example, you have “the drug group recovered, on average, 1.6 faster”; I assume you are missing “days” in that statement.

  • Typo: “… there were only 50 observations fro[m] each group”

  • When talking about why assuming no real difference, you could (as I do) talk about the alternative idea of always assuming a difference or always assuming there is an association, i.e. does it make sense to assume that there is always an association between any two variables (e.g. some exposure and a disease) or that we should assume there is no association until we find sufficient evidence?

  • For simplicity, maybe consider:

  • Null hypothesis #2: If the drug has no impact, then we would expect that the average recovery to be no different than the placebo.

  • Null hypothesis #3: Therefore, the difference in the average recovery times between the two randomly assigned groups would be an example of a result we got by random chance.
    since this gives the same message.

  • Interpreting Results: Although not super important, I would qualify what “the same or better”, i.e. recovery time better than or equal to 1.6 days.

  • nterpreting Results: Missing a 0, it should be 0.000205 or 0.0205% or one in 50,000 chance.

  • T-tests and MU test: It may be worth noting that permutation tests are nonparametric, which is why both the t-test and MU test can be applied.

  • The only “issue” I really see is a bit pedantic. Testing a difference or association is a two-sided test but your example is a one-sided lower test. So, since your alternative is mu_drug < mu_placbeo, then this works but since a two-sided test is mu_drug != mu_drug, and therefore could be either mu_drug < mu_placebo or mu_drug > mu_placebo, we need to “double” that probability to get our p-value. Not sure how you want to address this or if it is worth it, but a new section on what is the alternative and how it will impact the p-value calculation may be needed.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions