Header Logo

Connection

DAVID ALLISON to Research Design

Back to Details
This is a "connection" page, showing publications DAVID ALLISON has written about Research Design.
DAVID ALLISON
Connection Strength
11.934
Research Design
  1. "Non-Markovian" and "directional" errors inhibit scientific self-correction and can lead fields of study astray: an illustration using gardening and obesity-related outcomes. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2025 May 24; 25(1):137.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.678
  2. Adjusting for covariates representing potential confounders, mediators, or competing predictors in the presence of measurement error: Dispelling a potential misapprehension and insights for optimal study design with nutritional epidemiology examples. F1000Res. 2024; 13:827.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.678
  3. Hidden: A Baker's Dozen Ways in Which Research Reporting is Less Transparent than it Could be and Suggestions for Implementing Einstein's Dictum. Sci Eng Ethics. 2024 10 16; 30(6):48.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.650
  4. Misstatements, misperceptions, and mistakes in controlling for covariates in observational research. Elife. 2024 May 16; 13.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.632
  5. Ambiguity in Statistical Analysis Methods and Nonconformity With Prespecified Commitment to Data Sharing in a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial. J Med Internet Res. 2024 04 03; 26:e54090.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.627
  6. Causal?models and causal modelling in?obesity: foundations, methods and?evidence. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2023 10 23; 378(1888):20220227.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.602
  7. From Model Organisms to Humans, the Opportunity for More Rigor in Methodologic and Statistical Analysis, Design, and Interpretation of Aging and Senescence Research. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2022 11 21; 77(11):2155-2164.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.570
  8. A practical decision tree to support editorial adjudication of submitted parallel cluster randomized controlled trials. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2022 03; 30(3):565-570.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.542
  9. Evaluation of the type I error rate when using parametric bootstrap analysis of a cluster randomized controlled trial with binary outcomes and a small number of clusters. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2022 Mar; 215:106654.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.538
  10. Errors in the implementation, analysis, and reporting of randomization within obesity and nutrition research: a guide to their avoidance. Int J Obes (Lond). 2021 11; 45(11):2335-2346.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.520
  11. Data anomalies and apparent reporting errors in 'Randomized controlled trial testing weight loss and abdominal obesity outcomes of moxibustion'. Biomed Eng Online. 2020 Feb 18; 19(1):11.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.471
  12. Best (but oft-forgotten) practices: identifying and accounting for regression to the mean in nutrition and obesity research. Am J Clin Nutr. 2020 02 01; 111(2):256-265.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.469
  13. Trial Characteristics and Appropriateness of Statistical Methods Applied for Design and Analysis of Randomized School-Based Studies Addressing Weight-Related Issues: A Literature Review. J Obes. 2018; 2018:8767315.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.420
  14. Issues with data and analyses: Errors, underlying themes, and potential solutions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 03 13; 115(11):2563-2570.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.412
  15. Scientific rigor and credibility in the nutrition research landscape. Am J Clin Nutr. 2018 03 01; 107(3):484-494.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.411
  16. Stated conclusion about industry funding is opposite to what the paper's data show: letter regarding 'Selective outcome reporting in obesity clinical trials: a cross-sectional review'. Clin Obes. 2017 12; 7(6):402.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.397
  17. Randomization to randomization probability: Estimating treatment effects under actual conditions of use. Psychol Methods. 2018 Jun; 23(2):337-350.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.387
  18. Common scientific and statistical errors in obesity research. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2016 Apr; 24(4):781-90.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.360
  19. Reproducibility: A tragedy of errors. Nature. 2016 Feb 04; 530(7588):27-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.356
  20. Best (but oft-forgotten) practices: designing, analyzing, and reporting cluster randomized controlled trials. Am J Clin Nutr. 2015 Aug; 102(2):241-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.339
  21. Getting carried away: a note showing baseline observation carried forward (BOCF) results can be calculated from published complete-cases results. Int J Obes (Lond). 2012 Jun; 36(6):886-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.254
  22. Design, analysis, and interpretation of treatment response heterogeneity in personalized nutrition and obesity treatment research. Obes Rev. 2023 12; 24(12):e13635.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.151
  23. Toward more rigorous and informative nutritional epidemiology: The rational space between dismissal and defense of the status quo. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2023; 63(18):3150-3167.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.132
  24. Reporting of methodological studies in health research: a protocol for the development of the MethodologIcal STudy reportIng Checklist (MISTIC). BMJ Open. 2020 12 17; 10(12):e040478.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.125
  25. A tutorial on methodological studies: the what, when, how and why. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 09 07; 20(1):226.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.122
  26. Incorrect Analyses of Cluster-Randomized Trials that Do Not Take Clustering and Nesting into Account Likely Lead to p-Values that Are Too Small. Child Obes. 2020 03; 16(2):65-66.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.118
  27. Observational research rigour alone does not justify causal inference. Eur J Clin Invest. 2016 Dec; 46(12):985-993.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.094
  28. Regression to the Mean: A Commonly Overlooked and Misunderstood Factor Leading to Unjustified Conclusions in Pediatric Obesity Research. Child Obes. 2016 Apr; 12(2):155-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.090
  29. Introduction to the series "Best (but Oft-Forgotten) Practices". Am J Clin Nutr. 2015 Aug; 102(2):239-40.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.086
  30. Unscientific beliefs about scientific topics in nutrition. Adv Nutr. 2014 Sep; 5(5):563-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.081
  31. Overstatement of results in the nutrition and obesity peer-reviewed literature. Am J Prev Med. 2013 Nov; 45(5):615-21.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.076
  32. Association of run-in periods with weight loss in obesity randomized controlled trials. Obes Rev. 2014 Jan; 15(1):68-73.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.076
  33. Misuse of odds ratios in obesity literature: an empirical analysis of published studies. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2012 Aug; 20(8):1726-31.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.068
  34. Is funding source related to study reporting quality in obesity or nutrition randomized control trials in top-tier medical journals? Int J Obes (Lond). 2012 Jul; 36(7):977-81.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.066
  35. Rank-based inverse normal transformations are increasingly used, but are they merited? Behav Genet. 2009 Sep; 39(5):580-95.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.056
  36. Testing for differences in distribution tails to test for differences in 'maximum' lifespan. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008 Jul 25; 8:49.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.053
  37. Obesity--still highly heritable after all these years. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Feb; 87(2):275-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.051
  38. Optimal allocation of replicates for measurement evaluation studies. Genomics Proteomics Bioinformatics. 2006 Aug; 4(3):196-202.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.046
  39. The PowerAtlas: a power and sample size atlas for microarray experimental design and research. BMC Bioinformatics. 2006 Feb 22; 7:84.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.045
  40. Design and conduct of a randomized controlled feeding trial in a residential setting with mitigation for COVID-19. Contemp Clin Trials. 2024 05; 140:107490.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.039
  41. A design and statistical perspective on microarray gene expression studies in nutrition: the need for playful creativity and scientific hard-mindedness. Nutrition. 2003 Nov-Dec; 19(11-12):997-1000.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.038
  42. Catechol-O-methyl-transferase functional polymorphism and nicotine dependence: an evaluation of nonreplicated results. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005 Jun; 14(6):1384-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.011
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.