The approach used here seems highly questionable as it only serves to detect peaks and valleys in hormone concentration via statistical means. There is no attempt to relate those extremes to biological phenomena, which is absolutely necessary to determining what true peaks represent from a biological perspective. Without that information, even statistically extreme deviations from the mean cannot be biologically defined as anything other than part of the baseline. It also isn't clear how this method would define a statistically extremely low hormone concentraton. Why wouldn't a low concentration be assumed to biologically represent 'baseline' rather than be statistically excluded from consideration? Likewise, if only a statistical methodology is used, then statistically extreme concentrations may be identified simply on the basis of the normal variance around the mean being small for some individials. In a case like this, an inordinately small 'peak' in some individuals could bias estimates of hormone concentration variations between baseline and nonbaseline conditions. All in all, the method seems to put the statistical cart before the biological horse.
You can also choose to receive updates via daily or weekly email digests. If you are following multiple preprints then we will send you no more than one email per day or week based on your preferences.
Note: You are now also subscribed to the subject areas of this preprint and will receive updates in the daily or weekly email digests if turned on. You can add specific subject areas through your profile settings.
Usage since published - updated daily