ArticleAnnual review of ecology, evolution, and systematics2022
Simulation Tests of Methods in Evolution, Ecology, and Systematics: Pitfalls, Progress, and Principles.
Article in Annual review of ecology, evolution, and systematics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- GHIST 2024: The First Genomic History Inference Strategies Tournament.Molecular biology and evolution · 2025Article
- A Comprehensive Evaluation of Taxonomic Classifiers in Marine Vertebrate eDNA Studies.Molecular ecology resources · 2025Article
- The accuracy of predicting maladaptation to new environments with genomic data.Molecular ecology resources · 2025Article
- Article
- Drift drives the evolution of chromosome number II: The impact of range size on genome evolution in Carnivora.The Journal of heredity · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Accuracy of Methods for Detecting Correlated Rates of Molecular and Morphological Evolution.Systematic biology · 2023Article
- Using Computational Simulations to Model Deleterious Variation and Genetic Load in Natural Populations.The American naturalist · 2023Review
- The paradox of adaptive trait clines with nonclinal patterns in the underlying genes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Complex statistical methods are continuously developed across the fields of ecology, evolution, and systematics (EES). These fields, however, lack standardized principles for evaluating methods, which has led to high variability in the rigor with which methods are tested, a lack of clarity regarding their limitations, and the potential for misapplication. In this review, we illustrate the common pitfalls of method evaluations in EES, the advantages of testing methods with simulated data, and best practices for method evaluations. We highlight the difference between method evaluation and validation and review how simulations, when appropriately designed, can refine the domain in which a method can be reliably applied. We also discuss the strengths and limitations of different evaluation metrics. The potential for misapplication of methods would be greatly reduced if funding agencies, reviewers, and journals required principled method evaluation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.