{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019867549668874173, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.289156626506024, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Ecological fallacy as a novel risk factor for poor translation in neuroscience research: A systematic review and simulation study

Translational neuroscience is largely concerned with establishing causal links between biological processes and functional outcomes. Exciting new methods have emerged and top‐tier biomedical journals are placing increasingly high demand for experiments that link outcomes. One pitfall to making these connections is the “ecological fallacy”—establishing a relationship between outcomes based on aggregate (averaged) results (a distinct issue from correlation vs causation).