Topic summary

A 40-week log with the measurement method stated — what changed since

Outcomes › Progress reports effect size data table DXA long read Solved

This is a generated summary. It shows the 5 most-liked posts from a topic of 14, in their original order, with the accepted answer included where one exists. It is a reading aid and it will miss nuance — the full topic is the record.

taper_shiftTL3Regular5 May 2026#3

Weighing daily and reporting weekly is a better protocol than weighing weekly, because it separates the measurement frequency from the reporting frequency.

29 likes 3mo

w.moreauTL215 May 2026#4

Adding a reference point for 40-week log. Mine is a single case, collected without controls, and I am posting the method alongside it so it can be discounted appropriately.

15 likes 2mo

m.stephanopoulosTL3Regular Solution8 Jun 2026#7

Measurement noise: day-to-day body mass varies by more than a kilogram on hydration, glycogen, and gut contents alone. A weekly reading is a single noisy sample of a distribution. A seven-day rolling mean of daily readings has much lower noise.

The answer changed when I changed how I was measuring, which was informative.

22 likes 2mo

ro.zielinskiTL27 Jul 2026#11

baseline_peak, post #5: I would call the community position on 40-week log likely rather than established, and I would be comfortable defending that hedge. Go to post

Adding thanks rather than a view. I do not have a view worth the space.

12 likes in reply to #5 20d

h.oyelowoTL2Regular14 Jul 2026#12

A single scale used throughout beats a more accurate scale introduced halfway through. Consistency beats accuracy for a trend.

25 likes 14d

Read the full topic (14 posts)

This topic was referenced in

[2026 update] Waist circumference technique and its repeatabilityOutcomes › Progress reports · 27 replies
A 40-week log with the measurement method stated — does this still hold?Outcomes › Progress reports · 5 replies

Suggested topics

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
An 18-month record including the parts that went badly Outcomes › Progress reports data table long read effect size DXA An 18-month record including the parts that went badly — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Asking about 18-month record on behalf of the question I keep seeing asked badly,…	+77	81	17k	12h
Coming back to: An 18-month record including the parts that went badly Outcomes › Progress reports DXA effect size long read Solved Posting this under the heading it deserves: An 18-month record including the parts that went badly Everything below is what sits behind that. Asking about 18-month record on behalf of the question I keep…	+83	89	52k	12mo
Comparing my trajectory with the trial curves, carefully — a second dataset Outcomes › Progress reports effect size data table long read Comparing my trajectory with the trial curves, carefully — a second dataset — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Maintenance rather than loss, which is the part of this that…	+77	81	16k	11h
Reporting a disappointing outcome, and why it belongs here Outcomes › Progress reports data table DXA effect size Closed Reporting a disappointing outcome, and why it belongs here Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Proposing that reporting a disappointing outcome deserves a…	+21	29	62k	10mo
About the Progress reports category Outcomes › Progress reports effect size DXA data table Pinned Wiki Longitudinal self-reports with the method stated. Scales, tape measures, and their error bars. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded with…		4	139	16mo

Related topics — sharing the tags effect size, data table, DXA

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
[2026 update] Why 99.2% and 97.8% on the same lot can both be correct Analytics › HPLC & UHPLC UV & DAD detection system suitability peak integration gradient method Solved Why 99.2% and 97.8% on the same lot can both be correct — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. I would like to understand what this number means before I…	+1	5	719	2d
A plateau that disappeared when I changed how I measured Outcomes › Progress reports DXA long read effect size Posting this under the heading it deserves: A plateau that disappeared when I changed how I measured Everything below is what sits behind that. I was wrong about plateau in a thread last spring and I would…	+27	31	7.2k	3mo
Individual participant data versus aggregate data Evidence › Meta-analyses heterogeneity risk of bias meta-analysis publication bias Posting this under the heading it deserves: Individual participant data versus aggregate data Everything below is what sits behind that. Something about individual participant data versus aggregate does not…	+30	34	64k	14mo
Journal club: SUSTAIN 6 and its retinopathy signal — does this still hold? Evidence › Journal club journal club effect size number needed to treat randomised trial The question in the title: Journal club: SUSTAIN 6 and its retinopathy signal — does this still hold? I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. Reading SUSTAIN 6 ( N Engl J Med ,…	+60	66	12k	16mo
Coming back to: Column chemistry choices for a 40-residue peptide Analytics › HPLC & UHPLC peak integration system suitability gradient method data table On the subject in the title: Column chemistry choices for a 40-residue peptide Working notes rather than a conclusion. Column chemistry choices — I have the observation and I do not trust my interpretation of…		2	43k	16mo