Premium
Appreciating the difference between design‐based and model‐based sampling strategies in quantitative morphology of the nervous system
Author(s) -
Geuna Stefano
Publication year - 2000
Publication title -
journal of comparative neurology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.855
H-Index - 209
eISSN - 1096-9861
pISSN - 0021-9967
DOI - 10.1002/1096-9861(20001120)427:3<333::aid-cne1>3.0.co;2-t
Subject(s) - confusion , meaning (existential) , relation (database) , computer science , sampling (signal processing) , management science , artificial intelligence , data science , psychology , data mining , engineering , psychotherapist , filter (signal processing) , psychoanalysis , computer vision
Quantitative morphology of the nervous system has undergone great developments over recent years, and several new technical procedures have been devised and applied successfully to neuromorphological research. However, a lively debate has arisen on some issues, and a great deal of confusion appears to exist that is definitely responsible for the slow spread of the new techniques among scientists. One such element of confusion is related to uncertainty about the meaning, implications, and advantages of the design‐based sampling strategy that characterize the new techniques. In this article, to help remove this uncertainty, morphoquantitative methods are described and contrasted on the basis of the inferential paradigm of the sampling strategy: design‐based vs model‐based. Moreover, some recommendations are made to help scientists judge the appropriateness of a method used for a given study in relation to its specific goals. Finally, the use of the term stereology to label, more or less expressely, only some methods is critically discussed. J. Comp. Neurol. 427:333–339, 2000. © 2000 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.