James P. Scanlan, Attorney at Law

Home Page

Curriculum Vitae

Publications

Published Articles

Conference Presentations

Working Papers

page1

Journal Comments

Truth in Justice Articles

Measurement Letters

Measuring Health Disp

Outline and Guide to MHD

Summary to MHD

Solutions

page3

Solutions Database

Irreducible Minimums

Pay for Performance

Between Group Variance

Concentration Index

Gini Coefficient

Reporting Heterogeneity

Cohort Considerations

Relative v Absolute Diff

Whitehall Studies

AHRQ's Vanderbilt Report

NHDR Measurement

NHDR Technical Issues

MHD A Articles

MHD B Conf Presentations

MHD D Journal Comments

Consensus/Non-Consensus

Spurious Contradictions

Institutional Corresp

page2

Scanlan's Rule

Outline and Guide to SR

Summary to SR

Bibliography

Semantic Issues

Employment Tests

Case Study

Case Study Answers

Case Study II

Subgroup Effects

Subgroup Effects NC

Illogical Premises

Illogical Premises II

Inevitable Interaction

Interactions by Age

Literacy Illustration

RERI

Feminization of Poverty S

Explanatory Theories

Mortality and Survival

Truncation Issues

Collected Illustrations

Income Illustrations

Framingham Illustrations

Life Table Illustrations

NHANES Illustrations

Mort/Surv Illustration

Credit Score Illustration

Intermediate Outcomes

Representational Disp

Statistical Signif SR

Comparing Averages

Meta-Analysis

Case Control Studies

Criminal Record Effects

Sears Case Illustration

Numeracy Illustration

Obesity Illusration

LIHTC Approval Disparitie

Recidivism Illustration

Consensus

Algorithm Fairness

Mortality and Survival 2

Mort/Survival Update

Measures of Association

Immunization Disparities

Race Health Initiative

Educational Disparities

Disparities by Subject

CUNY ISLG Eq Indicators

Harvard CRP NCLB Study

New York Proficiency Disp

Education Trust GC Study

Education Trust HA Study

AE Casey Profic Study

McKinsey Achiev Gap Study

California RICA

Nuclear Deterrence

Employment Discrimination

Job Segregation

Measuring Hiring Discr

Disparate Impact

Four-Fifths Rule

Less Discr Alt - Proc

Less Discr Altl - Subs

Fisher v. Transco Serv

Jones v. City of Boston

Bottom Line Issue

Lending Disparities

Inc & Cred Score Example

Disparities - High Income

Underadjustment Issues

Absolute Differences - L

Lathern v. NationsBank

US v. Countrywide

US v. Wells Fargo

Partial Picture Issues

Foreclosure Disparities

File Comparison Issues

FHA/VA Steering Study

CAP TARP Study

Disparities by Sector

Holder/Perez Letter

Federal Reserve Letter

Discipline Disparities

COPAA v. DeVos

Kerri K. V. California

Truancy Illustration

Disparate Treatment

Relative Absolute Diff

Offense Type Issues

Los Angeles SWPBS

Oakland Disparities

Richmond Disparities

Nashville Disparities

California Disparities

Denver Disparities

Colorado Disparities

Nor Carolina Disparitie

Aurora Disparities

Allegheny County Disp

Evansville Disparities

Maryland Disparities

St. Paul Disparities

Seattle Disparities

Minneapolis Disparities

Oregon Disparities

Beaverton Disparities

Montgomery County Disp

Henrico County Disparitie

Florida Disparities

Connecticut Disparities

Portland Disparities

Minnesota Disparities

Massachusetts Disparities

Rhode Island Disparities

South Bend Disparities

Utah Disparities

Loudoun Cty Disparities

Kern County Disparities

Milwaukee Disparities

Urbana Disparities

Illinois Disparities

Virginia Disparities

Behavior

Suburban Disparities

Preschool Disparities

Restraint Disparities

Disabilities - PL 108-446

Keep Kids in School Act

Gender Disparities

Ferguson Arrest Disp

NEPC Colorado Study

NEPC National Study

California Prison Pop

APA Zero Tolerance Study

Flawed Inferences - Disc

Oakland Agreement

DOE Equity Report

IDEA Data Center Guide

Duncan/Ali Letter

Crim Justice Disparities

U.S. Customs Search Disp

Deescalation Training

Career Criminal Study

Implicit Bias Training

Drawing Inferences

Diversion Programs

Minneapolis PD Investig

Offense Type Issues CJD

Innumerate Decree Monitor

Massachusetts CJ Disparit

Feminization of Poverty

Affirmative Action

Affirm Action for Women

Other Affirm Action

Justice John Paul Stevens

Statistical Reasoning

The Sears Case

Sears Case Documents

The AT&T Consent Decree

Cross v. ASPI

Vignettes

Times Higher Issues

Gender Diff in DADT Term

Adjustment Issues

Percentage Points

Odds Ratios

Statistical Signif Vig

Journalists & Statistics

Multiplication Definition

Prosecutorial Misconduct

Outline and Guide

Misconduct Summary

B1 Agent Cain Testimony

B1a Bev Wilsh Diversion

B2 Bk Entry re Cain Call

B3 John Mitchell Count

B3a Obscuring Msg Slips

B3b Missing Barksdale Int

B4 Park Towers

B5 Dean 1997 Motion

B6 Demery Testimony

B7 Sankin Receipts

B7a Sankin HBS App

B8 DOJ Complicity

B9 Doc Manager Complaints

B9a Fabricated Gov Exh 25

B11a DC Bar Complaint

Letters (Misconduct)

Links Page

Misconduct Profiles

Arlin M. Adams

Jo Ann Harris

Bruce C. Swartz

Swartz Addendum 2

Swartz Addendum 3

Swartz Addendum 4

Swartz Addendum 7

Robert E. O'Neill

O'Neill Addendum 7

Paula A. Sweeney

Robert J. Meyer

Lantos Hearings

Password Protected

OIC Doc Manager Material

DC Bar Materials

Temp Confidential

DV Issues

Indexes

Document Storage

Pre 1989

1989 - present

Presentations

Prosec Misc Docs

Prosec Misc Docs II

Profile PDFs

Misc Letters July 2008 on

Large Prosec Misc Docs

HUD Documents

Transcripts

Miscellaneous Documents

Unpublished Papers

Letters re MHD

Tables

MHD Comments

Figures

ASPI Documents

Web Page PDFs

Sears Documents

Pages Transfer


 

OUTLINE AND GUIDE TO SCANLAN’S RULE PAGE

(Apr. 24, 2009; rev. June 1, 2013)

The Scanlan’s Rule page of this site consists of a main page (which is accessed by clicking on the yellow wording “Scanlan’s Rule”) and more than 25  sub-pages.  Because the mechanics of the site sometimes cause that key page to get overlooked, a sub-page styled “Summary to SR” provides a link back to the main Scanlan’s Rule page.  An index to that page follows.  Following the index is a listing of sub-pages to the Scanlan’s Rule page that expand on issues raised in the Scanlan’s Rule page or treat additional issues.  

This page often will be less up to date than description of the Scanlan’s Rule sub-pages on the Home Page.

Outline to Main Page

Introduction

A.        Clarifying Points

1.  Merely Tendencies Though Powerful Ones

2.  Theoretical Basis

3.  Meaning of Changes

4.  One Pattern Implied in the Other

4a. Scale Issues

4b. Subgroup Effects

5.  Increasing Representation among Population Experiencing and Failing to Experience an Outcome

6.  The Value of Health Disparities Studies

7.  A Measure Unaffected by Prevalence

8.  Meaning of “Overall Prevalence.” 

9.  Settings Differentiated Temporally or Otherwise

10. Effects of Lowering Cutoffs on Employment Tests

11. Absolute Differences. 

12. Odds Ratios

13. Phi Coefficient

13a. Cohen’s Kappa Coefficient

14.  Longevity

15.  Gini Coefficient etc.

16. Irreducible Minimums

17. Concentration Index

18. Probit Analysis

19. Case Control Studies

20. Meta-Analyses

B.        Illustrations of SR1 and SR2

1. Feminization of Poverty 1

2.  Feminization of Poverty2. 

3. Racial Differences in Infant Mortality

4. Racial Differences in Adverse Birth Outcomes among Advantaged Groups

5. Whitehall Studies

6. Nordic Health Disparities

7. NCAA’s Proposition 48

8. Terminations from Employment

9. Racial Impact of the Three-strikes Law

10. Studies of Healthcare Disparities Relying on Absolute Differences

11. NHANES Data

12. Pay-for-Performance Programs 

13. Age Patterns

Listing of Sub-Pages Treating Particular Issues in Depth or Providing Other Relevant Material. 

The numbering of the pages below does not comport with the  placement on the website, as the numbering has not been revised each time a page has been inserted.

1. Semantic Issues sub-page discusses certain technical semantic issues that have some bearing on patterns described in the main Scanlan’s Rule page.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/semanticissues.html

2. Employment Tests sub-page addresses whether, considered in light of the points made generally on the Scanlan’s Rule page, lowering a cutoff on a test in fact reduces the disparate impact of the test in a meaningful way.

http://www.jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/employmenttests.html

3. Case Study sub-page uses a case study approach to illustrating some of the issues raised on the Scanlan’s Rule page and its sub-pages. The page is related to the Relative Versus Absolute sub-page of MHD.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/casestudy.html

4. Case Study Answers sub-page provides answers to the questions posed.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/casestudyanswers.html

[The material on the Case Study and Case Study Answers sub-page was later expanded upon in the Relative Versus Absolute sub-page of the Measuring Health Disparities.  That sub-page provides what I think may be the most useful demonstration that there can be only one reality as to the comparative size of differences between the well-being of two groups reflected by pairs of outcome rates.]

5. Subgroups Effects sub-page discusses the way observers mistakenly identify subgroup effects on the basis of the way factors are associate with different proportionate changes in the rates of groups with different base rates without recognizing the extent to which the different proportionate changes are functions of the different base rates or that the group with the larger proportionate decrease in an outcome will tend to have the smaller proportionate increase in the opposite outcome.  The page also discusses the more important issue of the estimation of the absolute risk reduction and corresponding number needed to treat based across a range of baseline rates based on an observed risk reduction in a clinical trial. 

http://www.jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/subgroupeffects.html

6. Feminization of Poverty sub-page addresses the way that increases in the proportion of the population comprised by members of female-headed families are interpreted without recognition that decreases in the prevalence of an outcome will tend to cause groups particularly susceptible to the outcome to comprise a larger proportion of the population experiencing the outcome than they did previously as well as a larger proportion of the population failing to experience the outcome. See Section B1 and B2 the main Scanlan’s Rule page.

http://www.jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/feminizationofpoverty.html

7. Explanatory Theories sub-page addresses the way that researchers believing they have identified a larger difference between rates in one setting than another may devise explanations for such perceived larger difference, usually without a sound basis for the perception that the difference is larger.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/explanatorytheories.html

8. Mortality and Survival sub-page had been an earlier version of what is now the Mortality and Survival page. It is retained solely to refer users of old links to the new page.

http://jpscanlan.com/mortalityandsurvival2.html

9. Immunization Disparities sub-page addresses patterns by which various measures of disparities in immunization and other health care procedures tend to reach different conclusions with attention given to the January 2011 Health Disparities and Inequalities Report of the Centers for Control and Prevention.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/immunizationdisparities.html

11. Truncation Issues sub-page, which is related to the Cohort Considerations sub-page

of MHD, discusses why the patterns described in the introduction to the Scanlan’s Rule page may vary when the populations examined are truncated portions of larger populations, as well as reasons why the Solutions approach on MHD is unsuitable in such circumstances. The matter is also treated on the Life Table Illustrations sub-page of the Scanlan’s Rule page.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/truncationissues.html

12. Framingham Illustrations sub-page uses information from online calculator of heart attack risks based on the Framingham studies to illustrate the patterns described on the main Scanlan’s Rule page.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/framinghamillustrations.html

13. Life Table Illustrations sub-page uses life table to data to illustrate the predominance of the distributional forces in circumstances where the differences in prevalence in different settings are great, as is invariably the case with regard to mortality when the two settings involve substantially different ages.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/lifetableillustrations.html

14. NHANES sub-page uses data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey to illustrate the patterns described on the main Scanlan’s Rule page.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/nhanesillustrations.html

 

15. Illogical Premises sub-page, which is related to the Subgroup Effects sub-page, explains why it is illogical to regard it as somehow normal that two groups with different base rates should experience equal proportionate changes in an outcome rate (given that it is not possible for two groups with different base rates to experience equal proportionate changes in such rates while also experiencing equal proportionate changes in rates of experiencing the opposite outcome).

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/illogicalpremises.html

16. Representational Disparities sub-page explains why it is not possible to appraise the size of a disparity when solely on the basis of the proportions a group comprises of persons eligible to experience an outcome and of persons who experience the outcome.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/representationaldisp.html

17. Statistical Significance SR sub-page explores whether, given that the same properties of normal distributions that underlie the patters described on the Scanlan’s Rule page, a test of statistical significance given unchanged population size would meet the key criterion for an effective measure of the size of difference between outcome rates (i.e.,, that the measure remain unchanged when there occurs a change in overall prevalence akin to that effected by lowering a test cutoff).

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/statisticalsignifsr.html

18. Comparing Averages sub-page explains why, irrespective of adjustment considerations, the issues discussed generally on the main page affect comparisons of an average of outcome rates for more than one sub-group with another average of outcome rates for more than one sub-group.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/comparingaverages.html

19. Meta-Analysis sub-page briefly explains that factors that tend generally to undermine sub-group analyses similarly undermine meta-analyses of effects on dichotomous outcomes.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/metaanalysis.html

20. Case Control Studies sub-page page addresses sub-page addresses a fundamental problem with case control studies in that, while one may be able to derive an approximation of the relative risk from such study, one cannot derive the actual rates.
http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/casecontrolstudies.html

21. Illogical Premises II sub-page explains that, for reasons similar to those discussed on the Illogical Premises sub-page, it is illogical to regard the rate ratio as a sound measure of association.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/illogicalpremisesii.html

22.   Inevitability of Interaction sub-page, which explains why equal proportionate changes will never be observed as to either rate save on the rare occasion when a meaningful differential effect, by happenstance, causes the relative changes in different baseline rates for some outcome to coincide.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/inevitableinteraction.html

23.  The Interactions by Age sub-page discusses and illustrated the pattern whereby almost invariably in comparisons of age groups with substantially different mortality rates, one will find opposite patterns of interaction depending on whether one examines a factors effect on mortality or on survival (that is, that the age group with the smaller proportionate effect on its mortality rate will show the larger proportionate effect on its survival rate). 

24. RERI sub-page discusses  explains that the RERI (relative excess due to interaction) is a problematic measures for the same reason that the rate ratio is a problematic measure of association.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/reri.html

25. The Criminal Record Effects sub-page discusses a situation where the author focused on effects of a factor on a favorable outcome and found a differential effect that is the opposite of that one would find with the more common approach of examining effects on adverse outcomes.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/criminalrecordeffects.html

 

26. The Mortality/Survival Illustration sub-page uses data on cancer survival by race and stage for various types of cancer to illustrate the pattern by which as which stages with higher survival rates tend to show larger relative differences in mortality, but smaller relative differences in survival, than stages with lower survival rates. 

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/mortsurvillustration.html

27. Credit Score Illustrations sub-page use data on racial differences in credit scores from a putative class action to illustrate the pattern whereby the lower the cutoff the greater tends to be the relative difference in failing to meet it and the smaller tends to be the relative difference in meeting it.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/creditscoreillustration.html

28. Income Illustrations sub-pages uses income data to show the lower the income level, the greater tends to be the relative difference in failing to reach it and the smaller tends to be the relative difference in reaching it.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/incomeillustrations.html

29. Collected Illustrations sub-page merely collects links to the illustration pages in order to facilitate referencing those pages.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/collectedillustrations.html

30. Sears Case Illustration page explains the relationship of evidence in the EEOC v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. to recognition of the pattern whereby the rarer an outcome the greater tends to be the relative difference in experiencing it and the smaller tends to be the relative difference in avoiding it.

http://jpscanlan.com/scanlansrule/searscaseillustration.html