mike_mod said:Update — my curve sits below the published mean and the explanation is that the trial arm had support I do not have.
Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.
mike_mod said:Update — my curve sits below the published mean and the explanation is that the trial arm had support I do not have.
Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
mike_mod said:Update — my curve sits below the published mean and the explanation is that the trial arm had support I do not have.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsClinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.
Dr.SurgeonPGH said:Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the…
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. Posting only so the count is not one.