I would put moderate confidence on the mainstream reading of SUSTAIN 6 and no more. That is not scepticism for its own sake; it is where the sourcing actually stops.
3 likes 18mo
Evidence · Journal club · continued
Journal club: SUSTAIN 6 and its retinopathy signal — does this still hold? posts 31–60
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
On SUSTAIN 6: the maintained page in the documentation commons covers the general case with citations and a review date, which is more reliable than any reply here including this one.
11 likes 18mo
Taking post #31 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.
31 likes 18mo
m.malinowski, post #33: Taking post #31 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. Go to post
Nobody has said the unglamorous part of SUSTAIN 6 yet, so: most of the variation is explained by things that are boring to write about and easy to check.
r.laurent, post #8: 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. Go to post
Worth separating SUSTAIN 6 as a question about the compound from SUSTAIN 6 as a question about the documentation. They get answered by different people and only one of them is answerable here.
Helpful, and easy to find again, which is half of what a good reply is.
1 like 18mo
Post #37 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
The reason SUSTAIN 6 keeps being re-asked is that the answer is conditional and people quote it without the condition. It is not that the answer is unknown.
10 likes 18mo
e.almeida, post #11: Picking up post #8: that is the part I would want checked first. A definition problem is doing most of the work in this SUSTAIN 6 discussion. Once the term is pinned down I suspect the disagreement mostly goes away and what is left is small. Go to post
Post #37 and I disagree about the size of the effect, not about the direction.
A note on how SUSTAIN 6 gets discussed rather than on SUSTAIN 6 itself: the confident posts get the replies and the careful ones get ignored, and the careful ones have been right more often.
no.silva, post #2: The opening post is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit. The confident answers on SUSTAIN 6 and the well-sourced answers are not the same answers, which is the most useful thing I have learned reading this category. Go to post
SUSTAIN 6 came up in a thread eighteen months ago and was answered well. I cannot find it, which is itself the problem, so here is the reconstruction.
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.
24 likes 17mo
Post #41 put the caveat in the right place and I want to underline it.
Where the SUSTAIN 6 discussion usually stalls is that nobody wants to say "I do not know" and everyone is willing to say "it varies". Those are the same sentence with different clothes on.
4 likes 17mo
buffer_sheet, post #42: SUSTAIN 6 came up in a thread eighteen months ago and was answered well. I cannot find it, which is itself the problem, so here is the reconstruction. Go to post
Building on post #45 rather than restating it.
The arithmetic on SUSTAIN 6 is the easy part and it is where the errors are, which is an uncomfortable combination. Show your working and someone will catch it.
Rodrigues, post #13: Acknowledging rather than arguing. The reasoning holds as far as I can follow it. Go to post
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.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Right, and stated more narrowly than I would have dared to state it.
On post #50 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
What would change my mind on SUSTAIN 6 is a second dataset collected by someone with no stake in the first. Until then I hold it loosely and I would rather say so than pretend to more.
0 likes 17mo
Post #52 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
On SUSTAIN 6, the part that usually goes wrong is that the question is asked as though it has one answer. It has a range, and the width of the range is the interesting bit.
If you can post the two or three numbers you are working from, several people here will check the arithmetic rather than argue about the conclusion.
5 likes 17mo
e.verhoeven, post #9: Where I part company with post #8, and it is a narrow parting. Practical note on SUSTAIN 6: write down what you expect before you look. The number of times I have found what I went looking for is higher than chance would allow. Go to post
Sessions on negative or null results are consistently the most instructive and the hardest to get anyone to attend.
a.reyes, post #27: 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. I would want to see it done twice before believing it once. Go to post
This follows post #52 rather than contradicting it.
The most useful thing anyone has posted about SUSTAIN 6 in this category was a table of what had been measured and by whom. That is what I would want again.
Worth separating two things that post #54 runs together.
Where the group cannot agree, record the disagreement rather than resolving it by seniority. The recorded disagreement is more honest and more useful later.
The reasoning is more useful than the number, which is why I have shown it.
0 likes 16mo
c.nyberg, post #16: Post #14 describes the usual case. This is about the unusual one. 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 would put this at better than even and not much better. Go to post
SUSTAIN 6 has been discussed here with more heat than it deserves, mostly because two definitions have been in play the whole time.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Quietly grateful for the plain phrasing. Not every thread gets that.