This is a more general statiscal question, not specific to R:
As I move through my masters curriculum in statistics, I am becoming more and more attuned to issues of model fit and diagnostics (graphical methods, AIC, BIC, deviance, etc.) As my regression professor always likes to say, only draw substantive conclusions from valid models.
Yet in published articles in my field (medicine), I rarely see any explicit description of whether, and if so how, model fit was assessed and assumptions checked. Mostly the results sections are all about hypothesis testing on model coefficients.
Is this common in other disciplines? Are there fields of study in which it is customary to provide a discussion of model adequacy, either in the text or perhaps in an online appendix?
And if that discussion is not provided, what, if anything, can one conclude about whether, and how well, it was done? Is it sort of taken as a given that those diagnostic checks were carried out? Do journal editors often ask?
Thanks for your thoughts. --Chris Ryan Clinical Associate Professor of Family Medicine SUNY Upstate Medical University Clinical Campus at Binghamton ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
