This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1 · go to the accepted answer.
Building on post #60 rather than restating it.
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.
I have separated what I observed from what I concluded, which does not always happen.
Post #58 put the caveat in the right place and I want to underline it.
Distinguishing three things in the SURMOUNT-1 discussion that keep getting used interchangeably: the observation, the proposed mechanism, and the recommendation that gets attached to both.
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 rule of thumb is fine; the edge cases are where it earns its keep.
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Journal club: STEP 4 and what a withdrawal design can prove — one year on
Journal club: STEP 4 and what a withdrawal design can prove — one year on Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Session topic: STEP 4 ( JAMA , 2021). Please read…
|
+56 | 62 | 34k | 15mo |
|
Journal club: the retatrutide phase 2 obesity paper
Journal club: the retatrutide phase 2 obesity paper — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Collecting what is known about retatrutide phase 2 obesity paper in one place, because…
|
+7 | 11 | 33k | 7mo |
|
Journal club: SURMOUNT-4 and continuation versus withdrawal — a second dataset
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Journal club: SURMOUNT-4 and continuation versus withdrawal — a second dataset Everything below is what sits behind that. Posting a small dataset on SURMOUNT-4 and…
|
+58 | 64 | 17k | 13mo |
|
Second pass at: Journal club: STEP 4 and what a withdrawal design can prove
Second pass at: Journal club: STEP 4 and what a withdrawal design can prove Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. The question about STEP 4 that I actually want…
|
+81 | 90 | 54k | 9mo |
|
[2026 update] Journal club: FLOW and the renal composite, component by component
Journal club: FLOW and the renal composite, component by component Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. A question about what the numbers mean rather than what…
|
2 | 21k | 9d |
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Measurement error in a self-reported exposure
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Measurement error in a self-reported exposure Everything below is what sits behind that. The question about measurement error that I actually want answered is the…
|
+117 | 129 | 45k | 5mo |
|
Publication bias detection and its low power — does this still hold?
The question in the title: Publication bias detection and its low power — does this still hold? I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. Collecting what is known about Publication…
|
+24 | 28 | 2.4k | 3mo |
|
Second pass at: Multiplicity when you track fifteen variables
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Second pass at: Multiplicity when you track fifteen variables Everything below is what sits behind that. Two things I would like separated before anyone answers on…
|
2 | 12k | 18mo | |
|
Retatrutide's phase 2 heart-rate signal and how to think about it — the long version
Retatrutide's phase 2 heart-rate signal and how to think about it — the long version Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Putting the numbers in the first post,…
|
2 | 103 | 17mo | |
|
[2026 update] Journal club: what we got wrong in an earlier session
Journal club: what we got wrong in an earlier session — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Bringing a claim rather than a paper, because the claim is the thing circulating.…
|
+5 | 9 | 4.2k | 1d |