Analytical Conclusion Sensitivity Review

Review how robust a consequential analytical conclusion is to plausible changes in data, definitions, cohort, time window, missingness, assumptions, model specification, and decision threshold.

Provide:
- Exact conclusion, decision it supports, affected population, time horizon, and consequence of error: [Decision and analytical conclusion]
- Source data or extracts, calculations, queries, outputs, uncertainty, validation, and provenance evidence: [Data calculations and evidence]
- Metric definitions, inclusion/exclusion, transformations, causal or forecasting assumptions, model choices, overrides, and missing-data treatment: [Definitions assumptions and model choices]
- Plausible alternative cohorts, periods, definitions, models, thresholds, corrections, and scenarios already tested or proposed: [Alternative specifications and scenarios]
- Materiality threshold, risk tolerance, data owner, analyst, domain reviewer, and decision owner: [Risk thresholds and accountable owners]

Do not invent rerun results. If executable data or results are not supplied, specify exact sensitivity analyses and how to interpret them. Distinguish observed evidence from inference. Separate arithmetic verification, specification sensitivity, sampling uncertainty, causal uncertainty, external validity, and data-quality exposure. Do not call a conclusion robust merely because its sign is unchanged if decision magnitude or affected population changes materially.

Review:

1. State the decision claim.
   Rewrite the conclusion as a bounded claim with population, period, measure, comparison, magnitude, uncertainty, and decision threshold. Identify language broader than evidence.

2. Reconstruct the analytical path.
   Trace source, filters, joins, transformations, definitions, calculation/model, aggregation, uncertainty, and final claim. Mark steps not reproducible from supplied evidence.

3. Identify decision-critical choices.
   List choices that could change sign, magnitude, uncertainty, ranking, threshold crossing, or affected group. Distinguish defensible alternatives from arbitrary perturbations.

4. Verify supplied sensitivity evidence.
   Compare base and alternative specifications across outcome, uncertainty, sample/population, fit or diagnostics, and decision implication. Do not select only alternatives favorable to the original conclusion.

5. Design missing sensitivity tests.
   Prioritize data corrections, cohort/time-window variants, metric definitions, missing-data bounds, outlier influence, placebo/negative controls, alternative models, priors, thresholds, and external benchmarks appropriate to the analysis.

6. Map the robustness envelope.
   Identify ranges in which the decision is Stable, Stable with narrower claim, Threshold-sensitive, Direction-sensitive, Population-sensitive, or Not assessable. State tipping points.

7. Determine action.
   Choose Use for decision, Use with stated limits, Stage or hedge decision, Collect evidence, Reanalyze, or Do not use. Assign owner verification and avoid implying approval.

Define acceptance evidence for every sensitivity conclusion: the expected observation under each perturbation, actual observation when a run is supplied, decision-boundary crossing, and reconciliation to the original claim. Unexecuted analyses remain proposed and cannot establish robustness.

Required deliverable:

# Analytical Conclusion Sensitivity Review

## Bounded Decision Claim
- Original conclusion:
- Evidence-supported wording:
- Population/period:
- Materiality threshold:
- Consequence of error:

## Analytical Path and Reproducibility
| Step | Input/choice | Evidence | Reproducible? | Decision exposure |
|---|---|---|---|---|

## Decision-Critical Choice Register
| Choice/assumption | Base | Plausible alternative/range | Rationale | Expected decision effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|

## Sensitivity Evidence
| Specification/scenario | Result supplied or test needed | Uncertainty | Threshold/sign effect | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|---|

## Robustness Envelope
| Condition/range | Claim status | Decision status | Population affected | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|

## Decision Recommendation
- Disposition:
- Claim allowed:
- Claim prohibited:
- Tests/evidence required:
- Owner verification:
- Revisit trigger:

Completion requires a reproducible analytical path or explicit gaps, a defensible set of alternatives, and a decision recommendation that changes when material tipping points are crossed.