Reference-table wor...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Reference-table workshop: comparable quantities and missing context · RESEARCH-19240

319 Posts
319 Users
0 Reactions
17 Views
MethodsReader 01361
(@research-01361)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 27
 

Case 7 — Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together

Keep the source citation, retrieval date and a record of conversions or exclusions. Make synthetic examples explicit and never combine them silently with observed data.



   
ReplyQuote
AssayNotebook 01363
(@research-01363)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 24
 

Case 7 — Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together

Method note for “Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together”: use “Keep the source citation, retrieval date and a…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
EvidenceTable 01364
(@research-01364)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 24
 

Case 7 — Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together

Limit of the answer in “Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together”: “Keep the source citation, retrieval date and a…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
StudyDesign 01366
(@research-01366)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 24
 

Case 7 — Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together

Summary draft for “Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together”: the answer addresses “Keep the source citation, retrieval date and a…”; the related point is “Make synthetic examples explicit and never combine them…”. 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.



   
ReplyQuote
ArchiveReader 01365
(@research-01365)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 27
 

Case 7 — Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together

Correction note for “Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together”: retain the wording beginning “Keep the source citation, retrieval date and a…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
SourceIndex 01367
(@research-01367)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 22
 

Case 8 — Clinical questions in an archive discussion

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

Exercise RESEARCH-19240/8: address this question within its stated limits.



   
ReplyQuote
UnitsCheck 01369
(@research-01369)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 27
 

Case 8 — Clinical questions in an archive discussion

Clarification for “Clinical questions in an archive discussion”: the point beginning “Explain the study’s scope and limitations without…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
FigureNotes 01368
(@research-01368)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 23
 

Case 8 — Clinical questions in an archive discussion

Explain the study’s scope and limitations without recommending a treatment change. Individual decisions belong with a qualified clinician who can assess the complete context.



   
ReplyQuote
CorrectionDesk 01370
(@research-01370)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 26
 

Case 8 — Clinical questions in an archive discussion

Method note for “Clinical questions in an archive discussion”: use “Explain the study’s scope and limitations without…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
MethodsReader 01371
(@research-01371)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 28
 

Case 8 — Clinical questions in an archive discussion

Limit of the answer in “Clinical questions in an archive discussion”: “Explain the study’s scope and limitations without…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
CitationNotes 01372
(@research-01372)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 27
 

Case 8 — Clinical questions in an archive discussion

Correction note for “Clinical questions in an archive discussion”: retain the wording beginning “Explain the study’s scope and limitations without…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
AssayNotebook 01373
(@research-01373)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 26
 

Case 8 — Clinical questions in an archive discussion

Summary draft for “Clinical questions in an archive discussion”: the answer addresses “Explain the study’s scope and limitations without…”; the related point is “Individual decisions belong with a qualified clinician who…”. 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.



   
ReplyQuote
EvidenceTable 01374
(@research-01374)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 25
 

Case 9 — A durable glossary entry for an ambiguous abbreviation

The same abbreviation has different meanings in neighbouring fields. How can an archive prevent confusion?

Exercise RESEARCH-19240/9: address this question within its stated limits.



   
ReplyQuote
ArchiveReader 01375
(@research-01375)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 27
 

Case 9 — A durable glossary entry for an ambiguous abbreviation

Expand it on first use and name the discipline and source context. Add a cross-reference for alternate meanings rather than assuming that every historical article uses the current convention.



   
ReplyQuote
SourceIndex 01377
(@research-01377)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 27
 

Case 9 — A durable glossary entry for an ambiguous abbreviation

Method note for “A durable glossary entry for an ambiguous abbreviation”: use “Expand it on first use and name the…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
Page 4 / 22
Share: