Regression to the mean¶
Barnett, A. G. (2005). Regression to the mean: what it is and how to deal with it. International Journal of Epidemiology, 34(1), 215-220.
Cited by¶
9 citations across 9 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
Mechanisms¶
- Baseline Comparison
- Regression to the mean alone will make a metric measured just after an extreme reading appear to improve, and a naïve before-after credits that reversion to the action.
This sourceExplains that extreme measurements tend to be followed by values nearer the mean and can create an apparent before–after change without a real intervention effect.
- Regression to the mean alone will make a metric measured just after an extreme reading appear to improve, and a naïve before-after credits that reversion to the action.
- Closed-State Capacity Challenge Panel
- Its central failure mode is mistaking an apparent floor for a real one: a plateau measured at an unlucky low point can rebound on its own,
This sourceExplains that an unusually low measurement can be followed by a value nearer the population mean on repeat measurement even without a real change.
- Its central failure mode is mistaking an apparent floor for a real one: a plateau measured at an unlucky low point can rebound on its own,
- Controlled Experiment After Plateau
- Regression to the mean and short-run noise are exactly what a control arm neutralizes.
This sourceExplains regression to the mean as natural variation masquerading as change and shows how randomized comparison groups separate that variation from a treatment effect.
- Regression to the mean and short-run noise are exactly what a control arm neutralizes.
- Matched-Pair Randomization
- Broken pairs are its signature failure: deleting the survivors of broken pairs after the fact is a quiet selection bias, and matching on a single noisy extreme baseline invites regression to the mean to masquerade as an effect
This sourceShows that selection on an extreme, error-prone baseline can make regression to the mean resemble a treatment effect.
- Broken pairs are its signature failure: deleting the survivors of broken pairs after the fact is a quiet selection bias, and matching on a single noisy extreme baseline invites regression to the mean to masquerade as an effect
- Post-Closure Gap Remeasurement
- It checks that the post-period was not an unusually light week and that the baseline was not a fluke low — because a chunk of any measured improvement can be regression to the mean
This sourceExplains that repeat measurements following an unusually extreme baseline tend to move toward the mean even without an intervention effect.
- It checks that the post-period was not an unusually light week and that the baseline was not a fluke low — because a chunk of any measured improvement can be regression to the mean
- Response Retest Assessment
- Crucially, it guards against a single lucky reading: one good morning could be noise, so the retest is repeated or averaged before its verdict is trusted, because a solitary measurement can drift back toward the mean on its own.
This sourceExplains that a single extreme or noisy measurement can be followed by a value nearer the mean even without a real intervention effect.
- Crucially, it guards against a single lucky reading: one good morning could be noise, so the retest is repeated or averaged before its verdict is trusted, because a solitary measurement can drift back toward the mean on its own.
- Trend Validation Review
- A subtler trap is regression to the mean run backwards: an unusually high period is often followed by a more typical one, which looks like a falling "trend" that is really just the series relaxing toward its average.
This sourceExplains regression to the mean: an extreme observation is commonly followed by one nearer the average, which can mimic a trend.
- A subtler trap is regression to the mean run backwards: an unusually high period is often followed by a more typical one, which looks like a falling "trend" that is really just the series relaxing toward its average.
- Within-Unit Change Assay
- Its failure mode is regression to the mean masquerading as transmission.
This sourceExplains how regression to the mean can make natural variation in repeated measurements masquerade as real change.
- Its failure mode is regression to the mean masquerading as transmission.
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 9 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:8a6884bba66a · see in the full table