newstart_MO said:Forest plot interpretation for the the trial evidence meta-analysis: when reading the pooled estimate, pay attention to: Point estimate (HR/RR/OR) —…
Agreed, and the size of the effect matters as much as its existence. Something real and small gets treated here as though it were real and decisive.
A1cHero_PHX said:BariatricNurseD said: ...regarding the trial evidence...
That reframing is the part I needed. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
newstart_MO said:Forest plot interpretation for the the trial evidence meta-analysis: when reading the pooled estimate, pay attention to: Point estimate (HR/RR/OR) —…
I am going to disagree with the direction of travel here. The thread has converged on the tidiest answer rather than the best-supported one, and those are not the same thing.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsAdding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason. In three months the reason is what you will have forgotten, and the reason is what makes the record worth having.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.