Literature notebook: study design, measurements and translation limits · RESEARCH-31198

Case 18 — Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources

Correction note for “Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources”: retain the wording beginning “Locate the primary study and confirm that it…” in the record. If later material changes it, add the date, the changed wording and the source for that change; do not invent a completed correction here. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.

Case 35 — Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error · source wording exercise

Method note for “Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error”: use “Do not compare apparent visual distances…” as a row heading in a proposed working record. Put the statement, its supporting source or measurement, and any unresolved detail in separate fields. This proposes a format; it supplies no additional evidence. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 29 — Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing? · source wording exercise

Clarification for “Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing?”: the point beginning “Do not subtract the two percentages as though they represented…” belongs to the question as written. It should not be read as a report that a new check, purchase or experiment has been completed. Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 28 — Certificate of analysis: which claim does each measurement support? · source wording exercise

A reagent dossier contains a summary purity percentage but not the method or underlying trace. The draft index calls it fully verified. Which parts of that label can actually be supported?

Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase. Use the original answer fragment “A percentage without its method and sample linkage cannot…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.

Exercise RESEARCH-31198/28: address this question within its stated limits.

Case 18 — Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources

Summary draft for “Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources”: the answer addresses “Locate the primary study and confirm that it…”; the related point is “Record when only a secondary account was accessible and…”. Keep both connected to the opening question, and mark any conclusion needing further records as unresolved. Review focus: scope. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.

Case 19 — Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample

A collection of forum reports is being treated as a representative sample. What limitations belong in the note?

Exercise RESEARCH-31198/19: address this question within its stated limits.

Case 28 — Certificate of analysis: which claim does each measurement support? · source wording exercise

Method note for “Certificate of analysis: which claim does each measurement support?”: use “A percentage without its method and sample linkage cannot…” as a row heading in a proposed working record. Put the statement, its supporting source or measurement, and any unresolved detail in separate fields. This proposes a format; it supplies no additional evidence. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 31 — A correction log that survives the next archive update · source wording exercise

Correction note for “A correction log that survives the next archive update”: retain the wording beginning “They have different sources and may…” in the record. If later material changes it, add the date, the changed wording and the source for that change; do not invent a completed correction here. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 19 — Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample

Discuss who chose to post, missing outcomes, unverifiable records and changes in reporting over time. Such material can suggest questions but cannot establish population-level rates.

Case 19 — Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample

Clarification for “Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample”: the point beginning “Discuss who chose to post, missing outcomes, unverifiable records…” belongs to the question as written. It should not be read as a report that a new check, purchase or experiment has been completed. Review focus: scope. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.

Case 19 — Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample

Limit of the answer in “Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample”: “Discuss who chose to post, missing outcomes, unverifiable records…” is an excerpt from the discussion, not an independent verification. A reader needs the relevant original material before treating an interpretation as established. Review focus: scope. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.

Case 19 — Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample

Method note for “Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample”: use “Discuss who chose to post, missing outcomes, unverifiable records…” as a row heading in a proposed working record. Put the statement, its supporting source or measurement, and any unresolved detail in separate fields. This proposes a format; it supplies no additional evidence. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.

Case 32 — Assay-specific reference ranges: what must travel with a result? · source wording exercise

A value has been quoted without units, assay method or reference interval. What would make the discussion interpretable?

Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase. Use the original answer fragment “A forum comparison cannot diagnose a condition; a qualified…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.

Exercise RESEARCH-31198/32: address this question within its stated limits.

Case 34 — Correlation in a small observational dataset · source wording exercise

Reader check for “Correlation in a small observational dataset”: distinguish the discussion point “Association does not identify direction or causation, and…” from its proposed application. The thread offers a way to reason about the question, without adding a personal experience or a newly observed outcome. Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 25 — Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together · source wording exercise

Clarification for “Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together”: the point beginning “Make synthetic examples explicit and never combine them…” belongs to the question as written. It should not be read as a report that a new check, purchase or experiment has been completed. Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.