Premium
XXIII. The role of randomization in sampling, testing, allocation, and credulous idolatry (Part 2)
Author(s) -
Feinstein Alvan R.
Publication year - 1973
Publication title -
clinical pharmacology and therapeutics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.941
H-Index - 188
eISSN - 1532-6535
pISSN - 0009-9236
DOI - 10.1002/cpt1973145898
Subject(s) - statistics , confidence interval , sampling (signal processing) , randomization , population , p value , sample size determination , sample (material) , mathematics , coverage probability , econometrics , statistical hypothesis testing , computer science , randomized controlled trial , medicine , surgery , chemistry , filter (signal processing) , chromatography , computer vision , environmental health
The previous paper 13 in this series was concerned with the advantages and pitfalls of using a randomization process in sampling from a parent population. By depending on chance alone, the randomized selection removes any element of human choice in the sample, and allows the results to be interpreted with inferences based on statistical probability. These statistical inferences are particularly useful when the parent population is being sampled to estimate the value of an unknown parameter, such as the mean of a selected variable. From the results found in the random sample, the investigator can demarcate a zone of values, called a “confidence interval,” and can have a specified “confidence level” for the probability that the true value of the parameter lies within the demarcated zone. The main pitfall of random sampling is that it does not indicate the reliability of the particular sample that was selected in the research. The randomization process provides no safeguards against the 5% of chance occasions in which a 95% confidence interval will be erroneous because the “luck of the draw” produced a substantially distorted sample.