We provide expert statistical review, sampling, estimates and analysis to law firms, corporations, and government entities.
Salt Hill has assisted law firms in matters relating to healthcare, finance, insurance, product liability, audits, fraud and theft, labor and employment, public policy, government regulation, and education. We estimate key amounts at issue, review and critique reports, compose expert reports, and provide expert testimony in court settings. Dr. Salzberg has appeared in state and federal court as an expert witness in statistics.
In our litigation work, we always assume you want to know the right answer, whether or not it favors your position. We will work with your data to uncover both promising analyses and potential problems, because we believe that you need to have the unbiased facts to make the best decisions in litigation matters.
Salt Hill assists corporate clients with marketing analytics, forecasting sales and costs, data and technology audits, compliance matters, and litigation support.
We create statistical models to solve a broad range of problems, from helping a company predict the probability and severity of workplace accidents to analyzing loan data to predict default rates and loan performance. Our data analysis has helped our clients become more profitable by both increasing revenue and reducing costs.
Using statistical sampling and modeling techniques, we can sort through and make sense of massive quantities of data. We use quantitative methods to adjust for bias and to make valid estimates even when information is limited or key data is missing.
Salt Hill helps local, state, and federal government entities make informed decisions by providing statistical sampling, expert assistance in litigation matters, critical analysis and review of programs, and statistical audits. Our clients have included the U.S. Department of Justice, the U.S. Geological Survey, The United States Department of Labor, the U.S. Postal Service, state attorneys general, public service commissions, and the New York City Law Department.
The evidence that showing vaccines are safe and that they save lives is generally overwhelming, so I'm always pleased to see another article reviewing the data behind them. I figure such articles will lead to even more people being vaccinated and more lives saved.
However, I was disappointed that a recent New York Times article did the statistics so poorly. The article compares 10,000 people who got various diseases with 10,000 people who were vaccinated. This comparison is inappropriate, because most people who do not get vaccinated do not get the disease they are being vaccinated for, and, especially for diseases like the flu, many people who do get vaccinated get the disease they were vaccinated for. A proper comparison would compare some number of people who were vaccinated against the same number who were not vaccinated.
This post has nothing to do with the inter-workings of the FDA.
A short note about election polls, which I've been following somewhat religiously for the last few weeks. Election polls differ in at least four significant ways from actual v...