Methods reading room: what analytical reports actually establish · RESEARCH-25905

Case 277 — Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured · documentation exercise

Method note for “Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured”: use “Interpretive discussion belongs alongside the evidence, not…” 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. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.

Case 277 — Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured · documentation exercise

Limit of the answer in “Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured”: “Interpretive discussion belongs alongside the evidence, not…” 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: documentation. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.

Case 277 — Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured · documentation exercise

Correction note for “Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured”: retain the wording beginning “Interpretive discussion belongs alongside the evidence, not…” 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. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.

Case 277 — Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured · documentation exercise

Summary draft for “Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured”: the answer addresses “Interpretive discussion belongs alongside the evidence, not…”; the related point is “Describe the measurement, population or model,…”. Keep both connected to the opening question, and mark any conclusion needing further records as unresolved. Review focus: documentation. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.

Case 277 — Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured · documentation exercise

Reader check for “Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured”: distinguish the discussion point “Interpretive discussion belongs alongside the evidence, not…” 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: documentation. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.

Case 278 — Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together · documentation exercise

A table has been copied into a new format without its source or transformation notes. What should accompany it?

Review focus: documentation. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format. Use the original answer fragment “Make synthetic examples explicit and never combine them…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.

Exercise RESEARCH-25905/278: address this question within its stated limits.

Case 278 — Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together · documentation 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: documentation. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.

Case 278 — Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together · documentation 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. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.

Case 278 — Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together · documentation 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: documentation. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.

Case 278 — Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together · documentation exercise

Correction note for “Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together”: retain the wording beginning “Make synthetic examples explicit and never combine them…” 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. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.

Case 278 — Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together · documentation exercise

Summary draft for “Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together”: the answer addresses “Make synthetic examples explicit and never combine them…”; the related point is “Keep the source citation, retrieval date and a…”. Keep both connected to the opening question, and mark any conclusion needing further records as unresolved. Review focus: documentation. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.

Case 278 — Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together · documentation exercise

Reader check for “Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together”: distinguish the discussion point “Make synthetic examples explicit and never combine them…” 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: documentation. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.

Case 279 — Clinical questions in an archive discussion · documentation exercise

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

Review focus: documentation. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format. 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-25905/279: address this question within its stated limits.

Case 279 — Clinical questions in an archive discussion · documentation exercise

Clarification for “Clinical questions in an archive discussion”: the point beginning “Individual decisions belong with a qualified clinician who…” 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: documentation. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.

Case 279 — Clinical questions in an archive discussion · documentation exercise

Method note for “Clinical questions in an archive discussion”: use “Individual decisions belong with a qualified clinician who…” 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. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.