
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


Click here to get to the homepage of the episode!
Prespecified=good and post-hoc=bad. This is how we as statistician see it usually and I did too. However, over the past years I realized more and more, that it’s not that easy.
How many details do you need to have to call an analysis pre-specified? Should we label a request to analyse a certain subgroup by regulators as well as a fishing expedition to find a significant subgroup both in the same way: post-hoc?
Lovisa and I together with some others are presenting at the next PSI conference about this topic and today, we dive already into this topic and identify different dimension to be considered to understand better the different shades pre-specified analyses.
Listen to this episode to avoid oversimplification and confusion in discussions in the future.
By Alexander Schacht and Benjamin Piske, biometricians, statisticians and leaders in the pharma industry4.4
99 ratings
Click here to get to the homepage of the episode!
Prespecified=good and post-hoc=bad. This is how we as statistician see it usually and I did too. However, over the past years I realized more and more, that it’s not that easy.
How many details do you need to have to call an analysis pre-specified? Should we label a request to analyse a certain subgroup by regulators as well as a fishing expedition to find a significant subgroup both in the same way: post-hoc?
Lovisa and I together with some others are presenting at the next PSI conference about this topic and today, we dive already into this topic and identify different dimension to be considered to understand better the different shades pre-specified analyses.
Listen to this episode to avoid oversimplification and confusion in discussions in the future.

78,430 Listeners

32,005 Listeners

30,681 Listeners

43,580 Listeners

9,522 Listeners

497 Listeners

166 Listeners

346 Listeners

8,522 Listeners

6,092 Listeners

29,188 Listeners

18 Listeners

2,981 Listeners

18 Listeners

23 Listeners