Daniel E. Weeks
@statgendan.bsky.social
Statistical geneticist. Professor of Human Genetics and Biostatistics at the University of Pittsburgh. Assiduously meticulous.
Reposted by Daniel E. Weeks
(Non-identifiability is the equivalent of looking at an equation 'A x B = 20' and claiming you know exactly what value A and B are.)
November 9, 2025 at 9:20 PM
(Non-identifiability is the equivalent of looking at an equation 'A x B = 20' and claiming you know exactly what value A and B are.)
Reposted by Daniel E. Weeks
In a field where evidence suggests that a high proportion of papers have serious flaws, a database of "potentially important" papers which appear *not* to have serious flaws might be useful, as well as identifying those that do.
November 9, 2025 at 10:36 AM
In a field where evidence suggests that a high proportion of papers have serious flaws, a database of "potentially important" papers which appear *not* to have serious flaws might be useful, as well as identifying those that do.
Reposted by Daniel E. Weeks
If people are using the correct statistics, casual inference and study design, they will quickly realize they don't have the funds to design the study, the time to learn the statistics, or the right data to answer the actual question they are interested in. Then they will never publish or get tenure
November 7, 2025 at 10:44 AM
If people are using the correct statistics, casual inference and study design, they will quickly realize they don't have the funds to design the study, the time to learn the statistics, or the right data to answer the actual question they are interested in. Then they will never publish or get tenure
Reposted by Daniel E. Weeks
![As of mid 2025, a PubMed search for ‘Mendelian randomization’ in the title or abstract returns around 16,000 results since its first occurrence in 2003. Manual inspection of the hundred or so most recent MR papers in the literature indicates that the large majority of these papers show signs of being low quality, often reporting on relationships of variables that have little justification to be analysed [4], failing to discuss the gene-environment equivalence principle to justify the study design [1], failure to use STROBE-MR reporting guidelines [5, 6], and often with clear methodological errors [7, 8].](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:3zyo4iakhqs47bttjalqgbk7/bafkreiaiycu3ti6dc5d6bo3etj4hvel42ucx2dak3m2u4ygbfd3lmvwe6y@jpeg)