On 24/07/15 07:07, Therneau, Terry M., Ph.D. wrote:
The following are in parody (but like all good parody correct wrt the
salient features). The musings of
Guernsey McPhearson
http://www.senns.demon.co.uk/wprose.html#Mixed
http://www.senns.demon.co.uk/wprose.html#FDA
In formal publication:
Senn, Statistical Issues in Drug Development, second edition, Chapter
14: Multicentre Trials
Senn, The many modes of meta, Drug information journal, 34:535-549, 2000.
The second points out that in a meta analysis no one would ever consider
giving both large and small trials equal weights, and relates that to
several other bits of standard practice. The 'equal weights' notion
embedded in a fixed effects model + SAS type 3 is an isolated backwater.
Terry T.
PS. The "Devils' Drug Development Dictionary" at the same source has
some gems. Three rather random choices:
Bayesian - One who, vaguely expecting a horse and catching a glimpse of
a donkey, strongly concludes he has seen a mule.
Medical Statistician - One who won't accept that Columbus discovered
America because he said he was looking for India in the trial Plan.
Trend Towards Significance - An ever present help in times of trouble.
On 07/22/2015 06:02 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
On 23/07/15 01:15, Therneau, Terry M., Ph.D. wrote:
<SNIP>
3. Should you ever use it [i.e. Type III SS]? No. There is a very
strong inverse
correlation between "understand what it really is" and "recommend its
use". Stephen Senn has written very intellgently on the issues.
Terry --- can you please supply an explicit citation? Ta.
Thanks Terry!
cheers,
Rolf
--
Technical Editor ANZJS
Department of Statistics
University of Auckland
Phone: +64-9-373-7599 ext. 88276
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
