[2026 update] Journal club: what we got wrong in an earlier session

Journal club: what we got wrong in an earlier session — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable.

Bringing a claim rather than a paper, because the claim is the thing circulating.

The statement gets made confidently and cites STEP 4 (JAMA, 2021) when pressed. I have read the trial and I cannot find the sentence it is supposed to rest on.

Either I am reading the wrong section or the claim has drifted from the source. I would like to know which before I repeat the correction anywhere.

Reading a preprint in a session is fine provided the status is stated in the first minute and stays in the summary.

That is a description of practice, not a recommendation of it.

Bringing the previous paper on the same question makes the session much better and doubles the preparation. Worth doing every third session rather than every one.

Adding a source would improve this post and I do not have one to hand.

Post #4 is the version of this I will quote in future. One addition.

The baseline characteristics table is the single most useful page for the questions that get asked here, because it tells you who the result applies to.

Not disagreeing with anyone above, just adding the bit I keep having to look up.