Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27722040›Full record

ArticleMetode science studies journal2015

BIG DATA AND STATISTICS: A STATISTICIAN'S PERSPECTIVE.

David Rossell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Metode science studies journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Information-Based Medicine in Glioma Patients: A Clinical Perspective.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2018
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

David RossellDepartment of Statistics. University of Warwick (United Kingdom).

Funding

Consistent variable selection in p>>n settingsR01CA158113 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI JOHNSON, VALEN EARL · 2011 to 2020
$2.8M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA158113United States NCI
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Big Data brings unprecedented power to address scientific, economic and societal issues, but also amplifies the possibility of certain pitfalls. These include using purely data-driven approaches that disregard understanding the phenomenon under study, aiming at a dynamically moving target, ignoring critical data collection issues, summarizing or preprocessing the data inadequately and mistaking noise for signal. We review some success stories and illustrate how statistical principles can help obtain more reliable information from data. We also touch upon current challenges that require active methodological research, such as strategies for efficient computation, integration of heterogeneous data, extending the underlying theory to increasingly complex questions and, perhaps most importantly, training a new generation of scientists to develop and deploy these strategies.

Indexed as

Big Datacase studieschallengespitfallsstatistics

Identifiers

PMID27722040
PMCPMC5053772

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.