I recently had to have some minor surgery. However, there's a body of thought that says it's safe to wait and watch for symptoms, and only have surgery later. There's a peer reviewed (I assume) paper supporting this position.
Upon reading this paper I found what looked like a statistical error. Looking at outcomes between two groups, they report p = 0.52, but doing the sums myself I got p = 0.053. For this reason, I went and had the surgery.
Since I'm just a novice at statistics, I was wondering if I had in fact got it right - it's disturbing to think that a peer reviewed paper stating an important conclusion would be wrong.
If any dan-level statistician here has the inclination, I'll post a link to the paper here for your perusal...
If any dan-level statistician here has the inclination, I'll post a link to the paper here for your perusal...
Is there any reason not to post the link immediately? You are creating an additional barrier (pretty steep one) that lessens your chances of getting any cooperation.
And happy new year to everyone.