82 karma · joined March 27, 2014
www.studydesign.io
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/clouden; my proof: https://keybase.io/clouden/sigs/stwYvucMJfut8aS58UNKWQTaGe4UYF3gxeQMLo-S-Nw ]
The cost of full body imaging is not just in the scan itself but in the procedures that follow it that require anasthesia (non-zero chance of killing the patient), cause pain and may cause secondary infection. In fact, just being in the hospital or doctors office to get the procedure has a non-zero risk to due to the concentration of sick people there.
My point was not that either side was correct but rather that a simple statement like "more data is always better" is not as simple as they seem to think it is. Those of us who work in this field deal with balancing the risks as best we can so that we can detect the marginal elevated risk of something in a way so that the benefit outweighs the costs (financial, physical and emotional).
Several years ago I worked on a study looking at the spread of bacterial lung infections in long term hospital patient. In order to get the data, we would have to intubate patients that did not need it. In this case, the people who approve these studies rightfully ruled that getting that data would be too painful for the patients to allow.
Biopsies caused by benign findings from a full body scan are not without pain, emotional distress, risk or cost to the patient. Period. It must be weighed against the benefit that the patient would recieve (all in the aggregate, or course).
In the back of Statistical Inference by Casella and Berger, there is a great chart making similar connections between the most common statistical distributions.
There is a lot of rhyming in statistics.
While replacing tires more frequently would reduce the number of blowouts, it would be very wasteful. In the US, DOT inspections are frequent and they look at the tires to make sure they are in good condition.
In this type of cancer, a lower specificity is an acceptable trade off for a very high sensitivity.
These kinds of models are also great for triage. Healthcare is a limited resource, especially in trauma situations which have been using models to measure survival for decades.
All federally funded research in the US is mandated to be open access.
As a data scientist with eight years of experience, I can take raw data, derive insights from them and turn them in to/embed them in production grade applications for business use. My goal with any project is to take your data and, with the help of statistics and machine learning, turn it into actionable insights. I look forward to discussing how I can help you.
Technologies:
AWS, Hadoop, Python, R and SAS.
Email:
chris@loudenanalytics.com
Links:
However, in a study like this, data quality is likely going to be a problem. Collecting good data about the shootings themselves is incredibly difficult considering we have 18,000+ police jurisdictions in the United States and even mundane things like reporting can very between them. Furthermore, the chaos of the situation may make data quality suffer.
Unfortunately, the best we can do is announce the limitations of the studies, as the authors did.
It is definitely a broken process in many companies.
Having a person who is hard to work with can be demoralizing to the team he is working with which will lead others to loose productivity. Nobody is good enough to justify making the work environment toxic.
That said, the power, flexibility and user community make it my go-to for any first crack at an analysis of data.
The first project is a cloud based power/sample size calculator as a competitor to PASS.
The second project is a statistical distribution visualization website with API to generate random values.
I would get the more powerful laptop if possible due to the text analysis and neural network stuff you will be doing. Hook it up to an external monitor if you can. It really helps to have the display at eye level.
It is a lot of fun and keeps my theory sharp (I'm a statistician by trade).