Notifications
Clear all
Corrections & citations
392
Posts
392
Users
0
Reactions
13
Views
11/08/2023 9:40 pm
Case 24 — Comparing laboratory methods across years
Method note for “Comparing laboratory methods across years”: use “Ask whether assay, instrument, units or reference intervals changed…” 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.
11/08/2023 9:58 pm
Case 24 — Comparing laboratory methods across years
Limit of the answer in “Comparing laboratory methods across years”: “Ask whether assay, instrument, units or reference intervals changed…” 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.
11/08/2023 10:44 pm
Case 24 — Comparing laboratory methods across years
Correction note for “Comparing laboratory methods across years”: retain the wording beginning “Ask whether assay, instrument, units or reference intervals changed…” 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.
11/08/2023 11:42 pm
Case 24 — Comparing laboratory methods across years
Summary draft for “Comparing laboratory methods across years”: the answer addresses “Ask whether assay, instrument, units or reference intervals changed…”; the related point is “Do not infer a physiological trend before assessing…”. 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.
11/08/2023 11:48 pm
Case 25 — Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive · source wording exercise
A cited article now has an editorial notice. How should the archive respond?
Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase. Use the original answer fragment “Do not leave the historical citation looking…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.
Exercise RESEARCH-19795/25: address this question within its stated limits.
12/08/2023 12:08 am
Case 25 — Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive · source wording exercise
Clarification for “Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive”: the point beginning “Do not leave the historical citation looking…” 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.
12/08/2023 1:21 am
Case 25 — Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive · source wording exercise
Method note for “Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive”: use “Do not leave the historical citation looking…” 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.
12/08/2023 1:40 am
Case 25 — Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive · source wording exercise
Correction note for “Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive”: retain the wording beginning “Do not leave the historical citation looking…” 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.
12/08/2023 1:44 am
Case 25 — Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive · source wording exercise
Limit of the answer in “Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive”: “Do not leave the historical citation looking…” 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.
12/08/2023 2:30 am
Case 25 — Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive · source wording exercise
Summary draft for “Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive”: the answer addresses “Do not leave the historical citation looking…”; the related point is “Link the publisher notice beside the citation, record its 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.
12/08/2023 2:41 am
Case 25 — Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive · source wording exercise
Reader check for “Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive”: distinguish the discussion point “Do not leave the historical citation looking…” 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.
12/08/2023 3:33 am
Case 26 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible · source wording exercise
A subgroup finding was not the primary planned analysis. How should it be summarised?
Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase. Use the original answer fragment “Treat exploratory findings as hypothesis-generating rather…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.
Exercise RESEARCH-19795/26: address this question within its stated limits.
12/08/2023 4:18 am
Case 26 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible · source wording exercise
Clarification for “Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible”: the point beginning “Treat exploratory findings as hypothesis-generating rather…” 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.
12/08/2023 4:21 am
Case 26 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible · source wording exercise
Method note for “Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible”: use “Treat exploratory findings as hypothesis-generating rather…” 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.
12/08/2023 4:50 am
Case 26 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible · source wording exercise
Limit of the answer in “Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible”: “Treat exploratory findings as hypothesis-generating rather…” 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.
Share: