All posts by lortie

Test questions for next week

questions
1. Please provide a brief summary describing how to critically interpret/read your advanced statistical topic when it is used in a scientific paper. Feel free to include a table or figure illustrating the guidelines, assumptions, or approaches to interpreting the reporting of this test in a scientific paper.

I really like this short article as an example: http://www.bmj.com/content/315/7109/672

2. Please repeat the above process but for a second topic that you did not present.

marking key /50 (but worth 25%) – please use as your outline
Q1. Worth 25 points.
Introduction to statistical test/10
Basic intro to purpose of statistical test & why you use it.
List assumptions and scope of inference for this test.
List advantages/disadvantages to this test relative to other options

Interpretation (or guidelines for readers)/10
Explain how to interpret the test-statistic(s)
Explain how to interpret the visualization
Explain what high, medium, and low values mean for the estimates and explain the accepted alpha for this test
List the key citations the reader would need to best understand this topic at a beginner level

Implications & context /5 (just a few sentences only)
Conclude your short note on this advanced statistical topic with a comment on its importance or changes over time. For instance, it is a relatively new technique and we can expect to see it more etc.
Implication or context could also include how it relates to our understanding of the underlying processes we are applying the statistical test to, i.e remind the reader the ‘why’ you do this test but in a bigger picture way here, for instance, this is an exploratory stat, or one for model building, or for assessing casualty, etc.

Q2. Worth 25 points.
Same marking key.

sample papers

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jrsm.1109/abstract 

http://opr.sagepub.com/content/1/2/99.refs

http://www.bmj.com/content/315/7109/672

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/26241204_How_to_read_and_understand_and_use_systematic_reviews_and_meta-analyses

 

 

 

Rubrics for assignments

Systematic review paper/workflow review /50

Title: informative, clear, useful. /2
Abstract: summarizes enture paper succinctly including implications /5
Introduction: Clear, appropriate length, introduces topic, states purpose and objective /10
Methods: Replicable, transparent /5
Results: Written description can stand alone /3
Discussion: Clear, does not repeat results, highlights novelty, relates to previous research, states implications /10
Lit cited & lit reviewed: appropriate and extensive (at least 40 citations and sufficient body reviewed)  /5
Figures & tables: sufficient, clear, stand alone capacity, summarizes salient findings /10

 

Open-science products /25

Options
datasets on figshare
presentation on slideshare
figures/infographics on figshare
interactive figure on plot.ly
video on camtasia

Information content sufficient to communicate main finding and include salient evidence/main findings /5
Visually captivating and attractive to appeal to a wide audience /5
Text associated with product well written and appropriately conveys details needed to understand product (i.e. meta-data, tags, text on slides, text on infographic, etc). /5
Science behind product sound, evidence-based, not too simplistic, and can be assessed by a scientific non-expert to your field /5

Related evidence also referenced (other workflows, reviews, statistical tests, products etc) very important to show how your work connects to other /5

 

Instructions for submitting paper

Here are the options associated with submitting the paper next week by 629pm (Oct 23rd).

1. Submit to peerj as a pre-print. The class & I will review and post feedback.
https://peerj.com/about/preprints/what-is-a-preprint/

2. Email to me directly as word doc and pdf.

3. Submit to google folder for class to download (folder I shared with you at beginning of the course).

If you would prefer for only me to see, use option 2. If you want more feedback, use option 1.

Remember: use appendices in the paper and include PRISMA report for systematic reviews.

Presentations: x-people past & future

(1) Thank you for the presentations last week (past). Super useful to get a grasp of the scope of the research and analytics for your fields.

(2) Reminder (future): beginning next week, you guys are up to bat for 3 weeks of advanced statistical presentations. We have the first two weeks covered by students. The last week, I can do as best I can.

Oct 23rd: GLM/GLMMS

Nov 6th: CART & Ordination

Nov 13th: SEMs and Advanced regressions.

x-stats

 

Systematic review guidelines

hi team,  just a quick update.

1. I deleted all commenting on blog. Spam is so annoying. Those bots!
2. Remember, you have to publish the data you collect for your review on figshare as part of your grade. It must include meta-data etc.
3. I have had a request for guidelines.  If you are not afraid of getting scooped, I strongly recommend you publish paper on peerj as a pre-print.

Guideline
Copy for formatting style of this paper.

https://peerj.com/articles/265/

Summary – you must publish data, include a PRISMA report, have at least two figures, and write a paper like the peerj example.

We can discuss this all next week, Oct9th, in class. However, in the interim keep cranking on those papers, get the two-three figures ready, the PRISMA report, and maybe the methods & results too.

The more you have prepped for next week, the more I can help.

What is a systematic review

Here are some examples of meta-analyses and systematic reviews from my lab to get a sense how simple they can be (that’s how we roll).

Meta-analysis:
https://peerj.com/articles/265/

Systematic reviews:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/geb.12202/abstract

http://www.web-ecol.net/10/44/2010/we-10-44-2010.html

How to papers:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00970.x/abstract

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jrsm.1109/abstract

venn_diagram