Bookmark and Share

Notice: On March 31, it was announced that Statalist is moving from an email list to a forum. The old list will shut down on April 23, and its replacement, statalist.org is already up and running.


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[no subject]



In any event, a P-value of .45 seems implausibly small.

As a statistician, I think you expect too much of the "statistical
reviewers" or of peer review more generally.  Many papers that I read
contain rough edges and errors that, to my amazement, the authors and
the reviewers somehow failed to notice.

David Hoaglin

On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Ariel Linden, DrPH
<ariel.linden@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Adam and David. It's nice to know that I am not crazy. I also tried
> cci and iri and obviously got the same results as Adam. I am somewhat
> surprised that a paper in the Archives of Internal Medicine would not be
> scrutinized more closely by statistical reviewers.
*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/


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