ArticleEcology and evolution2025
Accurately Estimating Correlations Between Demographic Parameters: A Response to Riecke Et al. (2024).
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Correlations between annual recovery and survival probabilities estimated from tag-recovery data have been used to quantify the demographic response of exploited populations to harvest. Deane et al. (2023) evaluated the bias and certainty of correlation parameters between recovery and survival probabilities estimated as random effects drawn from bivariate normal distributions relative to different prior distributions and sample size combinations. Riecke et al. (2024) observed that we incorrectly parameterized a precision matrix with Gamma priors and suggested using a Gamma(1,1) prior distribution for the standard deviations as an alternative. Riecke et al. (2024) provided results from tag-recovery models that estimate mortality hazard rates after fitting these models to tag-recovery datasets with large sample sizes. Here, we fit tag-recovery models to the data we previously simulated (Deane et al. 2023) while using Gamma(1,1) as the prior distribution for standard deviations while parameterizing these models to estimate recovery and survival in discrete time or to estimate cause-specific mortality as hazard rates. We compare our new results to previous results obtained while using Uniform(0,5) prior distribution for the standard deviations. When sample sizes were large, correlation estimates obtained with either prior distribution provided similarly reliable parameter recovery and inference, replicating results of Riecke et al. (2024). With smaller sample sizes similar to those available for most duck populations in North America, correlations estimated with either prior distribution were uncertain and ambiguous. With decreasing sample sizes, annual survival was estimated with increasing uncertainty when compared to annual recovery, likely contributing to the poor ability to estimate correlation. Consistent with the original interpretation of Deane et al. (2023) and previous literature, we found correlations were often estimated with high uncertainty such that the sign (+ or -) may be the only attribute of these parameters that can be reliably interpreted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.