Journal club: what we got wrong in an earlier session

Building on post #2 rather than restating 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.

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

Post #8 describes the usual case. This is about the unusual one.

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

Posting it because the silence on this was starting to look like agreement.

Picking up post #20: that is the part I would want checked first.

The most common failure mode is spending fifty minutes on the effect size and ten on the population. Reversing that ratio would improve most sessions.

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

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

I had written a reply contradicting post #55 and deleted it. Here is what survived.

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.

Caveat: everything above assumes the paperwork is what it says it is.

This is the answer, and the reason it is the answer is the more useful part.

The most common failure mode is spending fifty minutes on the effect size and ten on the population. Reversing that ratio would improve most sessions.

Worth separating two things that post #99 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.

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

The most common failure mode is spending fifty minutes on the effect size and ten on the population. Reversing that ratio would improve most sessions.