Journal club: indirect comparison between two programmes, defended and attacked

An hour is enough for one paper read properly and not enough for two read partly. The temptation is always to add the second.

The short answer was in the first line; everything after is the working.

This follows post #14 rather than contradicting it.

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.

I keep a log for indirect comparison specifically because my memory of it turned out to be systematically wrong in one direction. Six weeks of notes cost nothing and settled it.

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.

Sessions on negative or null results are consistently the most instructive and the hardest to get anyone to attend.

Thank you — that answers what I came here to find out.

Narrowing post #84, because the general version has more than one answer.

The figures usually contain the finding and the text usually contains the interpretation. Separating them for the first twenty minutes is a discipline worth keeping.

If you are new and reading this thread for the answer to indirect comparison: the answer is conditional, the conditions are in the third reply, and the rest of the thread is worth skipping.

Indirect comparison sits at the boundary between what this community can usefully discuss and what it cannot, and I think it falls on the discussable side, narrowly.