One-eyed Epidemiologic Dummies at Nuclear Power Plants
Kraemer and Arminger in a preceding article in this volume insinuated that in a meta-analysis on childhood leukaemia in the vicinity of nuclear power plants (NPP) in five countries gross methodological errors had led to falsified statistics. Major assumptions were a) arbitrary exclusion of publications with nil results, and b) publication bias in conduct of the meta-analysis. It is demonstrated that all appropriate publications providing data on incident cases of leukaemia and on the underlying population or rates of incidence with confidence intervals had been included. In addition it is demonstrated that all publications excluded from the meta-analysis either did not provide sufficient data on NPPs or cases of these publications had been already included into the meta-analysis from other publications.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 231 (2011)
Issue (Month): 5-6 (November)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Licher Straße 74, 35394 Gießen|
Phone: +49 (0)641 99 22 001
Fax: +49 (0)641 99 22 009
Web page: http://wiwi.uni-giessen.de/home/oekonometrie/Jahrbuecher/
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jns:jbstat:v:231:y:2011:i:5-6:p:621-627. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peter Winker)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.