I think one of the things about red teams is that they are paid and funded to find flaws which is very different from peer review which is best...
I came across this tweet. Where someone was doing research that they thought could be controversial (gender bias in hiring) and so asked others to...
Are they charging participants?
I think the criteria aren't really relevant - the trials showed no improvement in any measures that had a notion of reliability (i.e. not...
I saw somewhere that there is a change in the rules in 2006 or something like that to allow that level of sharing. Pseudonomized I think is fine...
It does lead to that question in some areas since insurance is about pooled risk and where personalized risk is well understood it doesn't get pooled.
In some cases I wonder if a the person really have ME or is it a different condition that is misdiagnosed - I believe, for example, that people...
I think its worse than when a doctor can't understand symptoms (because they are complex). The more messages around health anxiety are repeated...
I think the NIHR have taken some evidence synthesis activities in house now.
This is Cochrane trying to close down further comment on the review - given we have emailed a considerable number of people involved in Cochrane I...
I've also wondered if they are people who talk about doing trials rather than those who actually do them. Also who talk about evidence but who...
I think some of the people have been pulled into NIHR directly.
In other words this demonstrates that Cochrane cannot be seen as a trusted source of information
It can be more complex than that. If the service helps a school plan a bit better such as providing a rest area and suggesting rests between...
Basically two answers changed. And these can be very subjective in terms of moving say from "limited a lot" to "limited a little" The SF36...
I can't remember about NICE but most diagnostic criteria also include lists of diseases as exclusions as well as symptoms. I don't know if these...
Interesting statement - basically saying you can't check our work,
I think there is a real issue here in the SF-36 physical function scale. The scale is a fairly random set of questions around physical abilities....
That is quite a shocking comment from their editors. The protocols are not being updated as a priority - if it were a priority then it wouldn't...
I wonder if an alternative tactic for getting Cochrane to take us seriously would be to start reviewing and commenting on other of their dodgy...
Separate names with a comma.
