Helping reviewers assess statistical analysis: A case study from analytic methods

Abstract

Analytic methods development, like many other disciplines, relies on experimentation and data analysis. Determining the contribution of a paper or report on a study incorporating data analysis is typically left to the reviewer's experience and good sense, without reliance on structured guidelines. This is amplified by the growing role of machine learning driven analysis, where results are based on computer intensive algorithm applications. The evaluation of a predictive model where cross validation was used to fit its parameters adds challenges to the evaluation of regression models, where the estimates can be easily reproduced. This lack of structure to support reviews increases uncertainty and variability in reviews. In this paper, aspects of statistical assessment are considered. We provide checklists for reviewers of applied statistics work with a focus on analytic method development. The checklist covers six aspects relevant to a review of statistical analysis, namely: (1) study design, (2) algorithmic and inferential methods in frequentism analysis, (3) Bayesian methods in Bayesian analysis (if relevant), (4) selective inference aspects, (5) severe testing properties and (6) presentation of findings. We provide a brief overview of these elements providing references for a more elaborate treatment. The robustness analysis of an analytical method is used to illustrate how an improvement can be achieved in response to questions in the checklist. The paper is aimed at both engineers and seasoned researchers.