Manjari Narayan | @Neurostats
@neurostats.org
7.3K followers 860 following 1.6K posts
AI in Bio & Health & Therapeutic Development Bio: https://linktr.ee/mnarayan Substack: https://blog.neurostats.org Peek into my brain: notes.manjarinarayan.org Previously @dynotx @StanfordMed PhD@RiceU_ECE | BS@ECEILLINOIS 🧪🧮⚕️🧬🧠🖥🤖📈✍️🩺👩‍📈📉
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Pinned
neurostats.org
0/
Folks are asking for resources for learning about causal inference.
Here is a comprehensive reading list since no one address all issues —
What is causality?
When is a causal relationship is knowable?
How to infer causal relationships given from noisy and limited data?
Reposted by Manjari Narayan | @Neurostats
pwgtennant.bsky.social
I think the problem here is that most people who do epidemiological research - including many who might call themselves 'epidemiologists' - have not actually had any epidemiology training. I wish it was a protected title. With an exam that would require proving you understand residual confounding!
neurostats.org
Otherwise, I'm more considered about pre-validation issues — correcting for chronological age without nested cross-validation in biomarker prediction models.

The nonlinear thing becomes an issue if you want to make a claim that residuals are independent of age.
Reposted by Manjari Narayan | @Neurostats
For example, current evidence is that LLMs rely too much on interpolation rather than discovering underlying invariant causal abstractions.
neurostats.org
Same goes for structure determines function concepts
neurostats.org
I think Cox is earnest. It is scary to listen to him because he is right that the AI presentation of "facts" is largely based on what is popular, but you can also steer it to selectively give you evidence that confirms your own worldview.
neurostats.org
This appears to be a very problematic weaponization of casual reasoning that feels 'rigorous' because it involves a selective presentation of evidence. Some very excellent researchers have looked into the problems from air pollution.

#CausalSky #MetaSky

www.theguardian.com/technology/n...
Inside a plan to use AI to amplify doubts about the dangers of pollutants
Risk analyst Tony Cox’s work has been backed by the chemical lobby, and some health experts are alarmed
www.theguardian.com
neurostats.org
What year was this picture taken in?
neurostats.org
Exactly

> The people who care about a topic enough to research it will often have ideological motivations. The ideological influence is there. That doesn’t mean it’s bad science.
neurostats.org
Every few years there is a new article like this, but not much will change unless scientists stop relying on GraphPad Prism that doesn't offer any of this and have something they can use more easily.

LLM powered workflows might change this going forward.
neurostats.org
The grass is not greener, I'm afraid.
neurostats.org
It's a niche for sure. But it exists and it's underutilized and could be further developed
neurostats.org
Unless you are using inferential clustering methods that are designed to severely test any hypotheses against the baseline that "how often would you find clusters if the data was generated by these high dimensional null patterns or if data were corrupted by structured measurement error"
kevinmking.bsky.social
1) LCAs are designed to find classes. So when a paper's Aim I is "We'll use LCA to see if there are classes", it's like saying "We're going to estimate a mean and see if there's an SD". It's that dumb
neurostats.org
Can you demonstrate the extent and degree of different kinds of sequential selection biases from a #CausalSky #StatSky #MedSky perspective in public clinical trial datasets?

DM me if you are interested.

For instance in TrialBench?
github.com/ML2Health/ML...
ML2ClinicalTrials/Trialbench at main · ML2Health/ML2ClinicalTrials
Contribute to ML2Health/ML2ClinicalTrials development by creating an account on GitHub.
github.com
Reposted by Manjari Narayan | @Neurostats
maximoprado.bsky.social
the Mesoscopic Integrated Neuroimaging Data (MIND) platform will soon be opening also for outside researchers leveraging our new 15.2 T 🐁 MRI, SHIELD clearing and fully upgraded lightsheet microscope plus computational resources developed by @neuroak.bsky.social to handle large datasets.
neurostats.org
I also think most of the authors were not solid neuroimaging researchers. It was like a fun project. Not particularly good science.
neurostats.org
Neurobullshit is alive and well in education research. Reminds me of the good old days of @neuroskeptic.bsky.social on this 10+ years ago
abeba.bsky.social
I think the conclusion of this study is likely to be valid however it is worth noting that any attempts to localise cognitive tasks such as writing to a specific brain activation/connectivity is problematic because that's not how the brain works.

1/