Cited by 1,988Statistical Methods in EpidemiologyStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials

Regression to the mean: what it is and how to deal with it

Barnett, A. G·2004·International Journal of Epidemiology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Regression to the mean (RTM) is a statistical phenomenon that can make natural variation in repeated data look like real change. It happens when unusually large or small measurements tend to be followed by measurements that are closer to the mean. METHODS: We give some examples of the phenomenon, and discuss methods to overcome it at the design and analysis stages of a study. RESULTS: The effect of RTM in a sample becomes more noticeable with increasing measurement error and when follow-up measurements are only examined on a sub-sample selected using a baseline value. CONCLUSIONS: RTM is a ubiquitous phenomenon in repeated data and should always be considered as a possible cause of an observed change. Its effect can be alleviated through better study design and use of suitable statistical methods.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ije/dyh299

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. 20 Laird N. Further comparative analysis of pre-test post-test research designs. Am Statistician 1983; 37: 329-30.
  2. 21 Senn S. Regression to the mean. Statist Meth Med Res 1997; 6: 99-102.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barnett, A. G.
Affiliations
The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Barnett, A. G
Venue
International Journal of Epidemiology
Published
2004-08-27
Volume
34
Issue
1
Pages
215-220
ISSN
  • 0300-5771 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3685
OpenAlex
W2155188667
Cited by
1,988
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 199 · 2025: 147 · 2024: 163 · 2023: 131 · 2022: 145 · 2021: 140 · 2020: 115 · 2019: 97 · 2018: 106 · 2017: 89 · 2016: 92 · 2015: 108 · 2014: 88 · 2013: 80 · 2012: 60
FWCI
17.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Health and Medical Research Council
  • National Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Keywords
regression to the mean, repeated measures, measurement error, research design, baseline selection, follow-up data, natural variation, statistical analysis
MeSH terms
Clinical Trials as Topic, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Cholesterol, HDL, Regression Analysis, Research Design, Skin Neoplasms

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review