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

Case 30 — Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract? · source wording exercise

Limit of the answer in “Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract?”: “The reader should be able to see what was…” 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: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 20 — An evidence table with room for negative findings

Correction note for “An evidence table with room for negative findings”: retain the wording beginning “Include all prespecified outcomes where reported, null…” 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 26 — Clinical questions in an archive discussion · source wording exercise

A reader asks whether an experimental finding should change their treatment. What is an appropriate response?

Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase. Use the original answer fragment “Individual decisions belong with a qualified clinician who…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.

Exercise RESEARCH-31198/26: address this question within its stated limits.

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

Limit of the answer in “Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing?”: “Do not subtract the two percentages as though they represented…” 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: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 20 — An evidence table with room for negative findings

Summary draft for “An evidence table with room for negative findings”: the answer addresses “Include all prespecified outcomes where reported, null…”; the related point is “Separate the authors’ interpretation from the…”. 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 28 — Certificate of analysis: which claim does each measurement support? · source wording exercise

Summary draft for “Certificate of analysis: which claim does each measurement support?”: the answer addresses “A percentage without its method and sample linkage cannot…”; the related point is “Ask whether the sample identifier, issuing laboratory, report date and…”. Keep both connected to the opening question, and mark any conclusion needing further records as unresolved. Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 21 — Comparing laboratory methods across years

Two results were collected years apart with unknown method changes. What should be clarified?

Exercise RESEARCH-31198/21: address this question within its stated limits.

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

Reader check for “Certificate of analysis: which claim does each measurement support?”: distinguish the discussion point “A percentage without its method and sample linkage cannot…” 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 32 — Assay-specific reference ranges: what must travel with a result? · source wording exercise

Correction note for “Assay-specific reference ranges: what must travel with a result?”: retain the wording beginning “A forum comparison cannot diagnose a condition; a qualified…” 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 21 — Comparing laboratory methods across years

Ask whether assay, instrument, units or reference intervals changed and retain both original reports. Do not infer a physiological trend before assessing measurement comparability with a clinician.

Case 33 — A literature note that separates hypothesis from observation · source wording exercise

Method note for “A literature note that separates hypothesis from observation”: use “Keep speculation explicitly labelled and avoid translating…” 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 25 — Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together · source wording exercise

Method note for “Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together”: use “Make synthetic examples explicit and never combine them…” 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 30 — Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract? · source wording exercise

Summary draft for “Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract?”: the answer addresses “The reader should be able to see what was…”; the related point is “Was the analysis prespecified or exploratory, and…”. Keep both connected to the opening question, and mark any conclusion needing further records as unresolved. Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

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

Limit of the answer in “Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together”: “Make synthetic examples explicit and never combine them…” 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: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 21 — Comparing laboratory methods across years

Clarification for “Comparing laboratory methods across years”: the point beginning “Ask whether assay, instrument, units or reference intervals changed…” 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.