sophie_paris said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
Coming at sophie_paris’s question from a different direction. It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about. A precise question gets a precise answer; a general one gets everybody’s favourite anecdote.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look. It is a small discipline and it changes what you notice.
A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsTirzTom said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Pushing back on TirzTom here. The objection nobody has made: this only works if the measurement is doing what we assume it is doing, and that assumption has not been tested here.
Closing the loop on my own question.
Update — my curve sits below the published mean and the explanation is that the trial arm had support I do not have. That was reassuring rather than otherwise.