Stata The Stata listserver
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

Re: st: Power analysis after the fact


From   "Neil Shephard" <mdeasnds@fs1.ser.man.ac.uk>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: Power analysis after the fact
Date   Thu, 21 Apr 2005 13:55:01 +0100

> We were recently asked by an anonymous reviewer to
> include a power analysis on a manuscript submitted to
> a prominent medical journal. I always understood that
> such power analyses were not recommended (i.e. you
> should not do them) but I am not sure why. Can anyone
> please cast some light on this issue?
> 

Here are a couple of references on this topic...

Goodman SN, Berlin JA (1994) The use of predicted confidence intervals when 
planning experiments and the misuse of power when interpreting results. Annals of 
Internal Medicine 121:200-206

(You may be able to view this online at http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/121/3/200)

Hoenig JM, Heisey DM (2002) The Abuse of Power: The pervasive fallacy of power 
calculations for data analysis.  The American Statistician 55:19-24

HTH's

Neil

Neil Shephard
Genetics Statistician
ARC Epidemiology Unit, University of Manchester
neil.shephard@man.ac.uk
nshephard@gmail.com

"If your result needs a statistician then you should design a better experiment" - 
Ernest Rutherford

*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/



© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index