 |
|
Promoting Measured Genes and Measured Environments: On the Importance of Careful Statistical Analyses and Biological Relevance—Reply
Debra Foley, PhD;
Brien Riley, PhD
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
In reply
We appreciate the opportunity to respond to the letter by Drs Joober, Sengupta, and Schmitz. We were attempting to replicate a study conducted by Caspi et al1 and we therefore sought to replicate the methods and measures they used insofar as we could. We used logistic regression to model risk for conduct disorder because Caspi et al used logistic regression to model risk for conduct disorder. Logistic regression also has the advantage of being relatively robust to scaling artifacts (heteroscedasticity), which can be an issue when modeling interactions. We created a simple count variable of each measured adversity to obtain a quantitative measure of severity of exposure to family adversity. In practice, the architecture of familial adversity is likely to be complex and we would welcome efforts to address this issue in larger samples with greater power. The issue of statistical power . . . [Full Text of this Article]
AUTHOR INFORMATION
RELATED LETTERS
Promoting Measured Genes and Measured Environments: On the Importance of Careful Statistical Analyses and Biological Relevance
Ridha Joober, Sarojini Sengupta, and Norbert Schmitz
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007;64(3):377-378.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Promoting Measured Genes and Measured Environments: On the Importance of Careful Statistical Analyses and Biological Relevance—Reply
Anita Thapar, Gordon Harold, Peter Holmans, Frances Rice, Kate Langley, Tom Fowler, John Aggleton, Marianne van den Bree, Michael Owen, and Michael O’Donovan
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007;64(3):378-379.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
