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

29188: RE: 29176: Leiderman re: Lancet study: good science? (fwd)





From: patrick richard <rich0303@hotmail.com>

Dear readers,

As a result of these comments, I took a quick look at the study itself. Although random sampling is considered a gold standard in terms of study design ( GPS had to be used because of issues associated with random sampling in developing countries-- see author's explanation), the study has serious flaws and limitations in terms of data availability and statistical analyses. The author has acknowledged some of them.

But, I do not think the author has ever established an association between the temporary government and the rates of crimes in port-au-princes ( that was not the goal of the study either). It would require more advanced statistical techniques ( such as difference-in-difference or other techniques) than those used here to compare the rate of crimes ( or the growth rate) after and before the temporary government. This was simply a description of the rate of crimes, which can be associated with so many factors not controlled for by the random sampling. So any conclusion that the the rate of crime is due to the political system in place is unfounded. There are also other measurement issues that I do not want to address here.

Patrick Richard

N.B My comments are more concerned about the scientific value of the study as opposed to defending a specific regime or not.