Using simulation studies to evaluate statistical methods¶
Morris, T. P., White, I. R., & Crowther, M. J. (2019). Using simulation studies to evaluate statistical methods. Statistics in Medicine, 38(11), 2074-2102.
Cited by¶
3 citations across 3 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Mechanisms¶
- Monte Carlo Coverage Simulation
- If the data-generating process you invented is friendlier than reality — the classic simulation overconfidence trap — a procedure can pass with flying colors and still undercover in the field, because the regime that breaks it was never simulated.
This sourceWarns that simulation conclusions are conditional on the chosen data-generating mechanisms, which can favor a method and omit regimes where it fails.
- If the data-generating process you invented is friendlier than reality — the classic simulation overconfidence trap — a procedure can pass with flying colors and still undercover in the field, because the regime that breaks it was never simulated.
- Pre-Registered Simulation Grid
- A frozen, public grid makes the scope of a coverage claim auditable
This sourceProvides a structured simulation-study framework that makes the scope of design and performance evaluation transparent and auditable.
- A frozen, public grid makes the scope of a coverage claim auditable
- Simulation-Based Power Analysis
- A subtler trap is treating the replicate count as free: too few replicates and the reported power carries a Monte Carlo standard error large enough that the same design can read "adequately powered" or "underpowered" on consecutive runs.
This sourceShows that simulated power estimates carry Monte Carlo error and that replicate count must be chosen to make that uncertainty acceptably small.
- A subtler trap is treating the replicate count as free: too few replicates and the reported power carries a Monte Carlo standard error large enough that the same design can read "adequately powered" or "underpowered" on consecutive runs.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 3 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:507c7fad435a · see in the full table