Notifications
Clear all
Reading the evidence
367
Posts
367
Users
0
Reactions
3
Views
04/12/2020 9:02 am
Case 48 — Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing? · source wording exercise
A comparison table places chromatographic purity and net peptide content in one column. Both are percentages, but the reports define their denominators differently. How should the table be repaired?
Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase. Use the original answer fragment “Do not subtract the two percentages as though they represented…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.
Exercise RESEARCH-10203/48: address this question within its stated limits.
04/12/2020 10:03 am
Case 48 — Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing? · source wording exercise
Method note for “Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing?”: use “Do not subtract the two percentages as though they represented…” 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.
04/12/2020 10:22 am
Case 48 — 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.
04/12/2020 11:14 am
Case 48 — 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.
04/12/2020 11:31 am
Case 48 — Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing? · source wording exercise
Correction note for “Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing?”: retain the wording beginning “Do not subtract the two percentages as though they represented…” 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.
04/12/2020 11:40 am
Case 48 — Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing? · source wording exercise
Summary draft for “Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing?”: the answer addresses “Do not subtract the two percentages as though they represented…”; the related point is “Before comparing laboratories, ask whether sample handling, method conditions…”. 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.
04/12/2020 12:06 pm
Case 48 — Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing? · source wording exercise
Reader check for “Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing?”: distinguish the discussion point “Do not subtract the two percentages as though they represented…” 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.
04/12/2020 12:39 pm
Case 49 — Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract? · comparison exercise
The draft summary of a fictional reading exercise moves from an animal-model observation to a proposed human benefit. Which fields would keep the literature note within the evidence?
Review focus: comparison. Make the basis of a comparison explicit before interpreting it. Use the original answer fragment “Was the analysis prespecified or exploratory, and…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.
Exercise RESEARCH-10203/49: address this question within its stated limits.
04/12/2020 1:52 pm
Case 49 — Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract? · comparison exercise
Clarification for “Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract?”: the point beginning “Was the analysis prespecified or exploratory, and…” 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: comparison. Make the basis of a comparison explicit before interpreting it.
04/12/2020 2:09 pm
Case 49 — Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract? · comparison exercise
Method note for “Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract?”: use “Was the analysis prespecified or exploratory, and…” 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. Make the basis of a comparison explicit before interpreting it.
04/12/2020 2:10 pm
Case 49 — Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract? · comparison exercise
Limit of the answer in “Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract?”: “Was the analysis prespecified or exploratory, and…” 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: comparison. Make the basis of a comparison explicit before interpreting it.
04/12/2020 3:24 pm
Case 49 — Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract? · comparison exercise
Summary draft for “Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract?”: the answer addresses “Was the analysis prespecified or exploratory, and…”; the related point is “Record what the paper states and mark unreported fields…”. Keep both connected to the opening question, and mark any conclusion needing further records as unresolved. Review focus: comparison. Make the basis of a comparison explicit before interpreting it.
04/12/2020 3:26 pm
Case 49 — Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract? · comparison exercise
Correction note for “Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract?”: retain the wording beginning “Was the analysis prespecified or exploratory, and…” 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. Make the basis of a comparison explicit before interpreting it.
04/12/2020 4:14 pm
Case 49 — Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract? · comparison exercise
Reader check for “Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract?”: distinguish the discussion point “Was the analysis prespecified or exploratory, 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: comparison. Make the basis of a comparison explicit before interpreting it.
04/12/2020 4:30 pm
Case 50 — A correction log that survives the next archive update · comparison exercise
A archive table has a transcription error in a unit label. A later publisher notice also changes a figure. How can the correction history distinguish those two events?
Review focus: comparison. Make the basis of a comparison explicit before interpreting it. Use the original answer fragment “Each entry should retain the date, old text, corrected…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.
Exercise RESEARCH-10203/50: address this question within its stated limits.
Share: