Archive correction log: source versions, units and publisher notices · RESEARCH-09543

Case 78 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible · documentation exercise

A subgroup finding was not the primary planned analysis. How should it be summarised?

Review focus: documentation. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format. 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-09543/78: address this question within its stated limits.

Case 78 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible · documentation 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. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.

Case 78 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible · documentation 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: documentation. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.

Case 78 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible · documentation 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: documentation. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format.

Case 78 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible · documentation exercise

Correction note for “Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible”: retain the wording beginning “Treat exploratory findings as hypothesis-generating rather…” 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 78 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible · documentation exercise

Summary draft for “Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible”: the answer addresses “Treat exploratory findings as hypothesis-generating rather…”; the related point is “State whether it was prespecified and how…”. 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 78 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible · documentation exercise

Reader check for “Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible”: distinguish the discussion point “Treat exploratory findings as hypothesis-generating rather…” 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 79 — Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured · documentation exercise

A chart caption names a mechanism but omits the observed endpoint. How can the caption be made precise?

Review focus: documentation. Distinguish an original record from a proposed record format. Use the original answer fragment “Interpretive discussion belongs alongside the evidence, not…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.

Exercise RESEARCH-09543/79: address this question within its stated limits.

Case 79 — Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured · documentation exercise

Clarification for “Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured”: the point beginning “Interpretive discussion belongs alongside the evidence, not…” 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 79 — 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 79 — 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 79 — 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 79 — 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 79 — 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 80 — 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-09543/80: address this question within its stated limits.