In search of justification for the unpredictability paradox
نویسندگان
چکیده
A 2011 Cochrane Review found that adequately randomized trials sometimes revealed larger, sometimes smaller, and often similar effect sizes to inadequately randomized trials. However, they found no average statistically significant difference in effect sizes between the two study types. Yet instead of concluding that adequate randomization had no effect the review authors postulated the "unpredictability paradox", which states that randomized and non-randomized studies differ, but in an unpredictable direction. However, stipulating the unpredictability paradox is problematic for several reasons: 1) it makes the authors' conclusion that adequate randomization makes a difference unfalsifiable—if it turned out that adequately randomized trials had significantly different average results from inadequately randomized trials the authors could have pooled the results and concluded that adequate randomization protected against bias; 2) it leaves other authors of reviews with similar results confused about whether or not to pool results (and hence which conclusions to draw); 3) it discourages researchers from investigating the conditions under which adequate randomization over- or under-exaggerates apparent treatment benefits; and 4) it could obscure the relative importance of allocation concealment and blinding which may be more important than adequate randomization.
منابع مشابه
Unpredictability, Probability Updating and the Three Prisoners Paradox
This paper discusses the Three Prisoners paradox in the light of three different procedures for the updating of probabilities Bayesian conditioning, superconditioning and Jeffrey's rule as well as assuming the unpredictability of receipt of information by prisoner A. The formulation of the paradox in this temporal setting brings new insight to the problem and, on the other hand, the paradox is ...
متن کاملA Note on Fixed Points in Justification Logics and the Surprise Test Paradox
In this note we study the effect of adding fixed points to justification logics. We introduce two extensions of justification logics: extensions by fixed point (or diagonal) operators, and extensions by least fixed points. The former is a justification version of Smoryǹski’s Diagonalization Operator Logic, and the latter is a justification version of Kozen’s modal μcalculus. We also introduce f...
متن کامل2 00 9 Fermi ’ s Paradox – The Last Challenge for Copernicanism ?
We review Fermi’s paradox (or the ”Great Silence” problem), not only arguably the oldest and crucial problem for the Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence (SETI), but also a conundrum of profound scientific, philosophical and cultural importance. By a simple analysis of observation selection effects, the correct resolution of Fermi’s paradox is certain to tell us something about the future o...
متن کاملBertrand’s Paradox Revisited: More Lessons about that Ambiguous Word, Random
The Bertrand paradox question is: “Consider a unit-radius circle for which the length of a side of an inscribed equilateral triangle equals 3 . Determine the probability that the length of a ‘random’ chord of a unit-radius circle has length greater than 3 .” Bertrand derived three different ‘correct’ answers, the correctness depending on interpretation of the word, random. Here we employ geomet...
متن کامل