29188: RE: 29176: Leiderman re: Lancet study: good science? (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: patrick richard <rich0303@hotmail.com>

Dear readers,

As a result of these comments, I took a quick look at the study itself. 
Although random sampling is considered a gold standard in terms of study design 
( GPS had to be used because of issues associated with random sampling in 
developing countries-- see author's explanation), the study has serious flaws 
and limitations in terms of data availability and statistical analyses. The 
author has acknowledged some of them.

But, I do not think  the author has ever established an association between the 
temporary government and the rates of crimes in port-au-princes ( that was not 
the goal of the study either). It would require more advanced statistical 
techniques ( such as difference-in-difference or other techniques) than those 
used here to compare the rate of crimes  ( or the growth rate) after and before 
the temporary government. This was simply a description of the rate of crimes, 
which can be associated with so many factors not controlled for by the random 
sampling. So any conclusion that the the rate of crime is due to the political 
system in place is unfounded. There are also other measurement issues that I do 
not want to address here.

Patrick Richard

N.B My comments are more concerned about the scientific value of the study as 
opposed to defending a specific regime or not.