Journal club: SURMOUNT-OSA and a hard endpoint in a soft field

Posting this under the heading it deserves: Journal club: SURMOUNT-OSA and a hard endpoint in a soft field Everything below is what sits behind that.

Collecting what is known about SURMOUNT-OSA in one place, because it is currently spread across a category, two tag pages and a thread that is hard to find.

This is a summary rather than new work, and I have attributed each part to where I found it.

Where the group cannot agree, record the disagreement rather than resolving it by seniority. The recorded disagreement is more honest and more useful later.

If the premise is wrong, everything after it is decoration.

Taking post #13 at face value and following it one step further.

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.

The confident version of this sentence would be wrong, so here is the hedged one.

Adding the measurement that post #18 says would settle it.

On SURMOUNT-OSA, I would rather understate and be corrected upward than overstate and be quoted. That is a house style here and it is a good one.

Reading order that works for these sessions: registry entry, methods, baseline table, primary result, then abstract last. Reading the abstract first anchors everything that follows.

Small point, but it is the one that usually catches people.

Coming back to post #31, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

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.

That is all I can say without guessing.