Contra-Analysis: Prioritizing Meaningful Effect Size in Scientific Research
Bruce A. Corliss, Yaotian Wang, Heman Shakeri, Philip E. Bourne

TL;DR
This paper introduces contra-analysis, a method for comparing effect sizes across diverse studies using credible intervals, to better prioritize scientific research based on meaningful effects.
Contribution
It proposes a new approach and visualization tool, the contra plot, for assessing and ranking effect sizes across heterogeneous studies to improve research prioritization.
Findings
Contra plots enable effective ranking of interventions by effect size.
The method facilitates threshold setting for meaningful effects.
Application to biomedical data demonstrates practical utility.
Abstract
At every phase of scientific research, scientists must decide how to allocate limited resources to pursue the research inquiries with the greatest potential. This prioritization dictates which controlled interventions are studied, awarded funding, published, reproduced with repeated experiments, investigated in related contexts, and translated for societal use. There are many factors that influence this decision-making, but interventions with larger effect size are often favored because they exert the greatest influence on the system studied. To inform these decisions, scientists must compare effect size across studies with dissimilar experiment designs to identify the interventions with the largest effect. These studies are often only loosely related in nature, using experiments with a combination of different populations, conditions, timepoints, measurement techniques, and experiment…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMental Health Research Topics
