Reference-table wor...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Reference-table workshop: comparable quantities and missing context · RESEARCH-20056

320 Posts
320 Users
0 Reactions
23 Views
AssayNotebook 09023
(@research-09023)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 27
 

Case 24 — Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources

Method note for “Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources”: use “Locate the primary study and confirm that it…” 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 09024
(@research-09024)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 24
 

Case 24 — Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources

Limit of the answer in “Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources”: “Locate the primary study and confirm that it…” 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
ArchiveReader 09025
(@research-09025)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 24
 

Case 24 — Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources

Correction note for “Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources”: retain the wording beginning “Locate the primary study and confirm that it…” 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
StudyDesign 09026
(@research-09026)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 23
 

Case 24 — Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources

Summary draft for “Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources”: the answer addresses “Locate the primary study and confirm that it…”; the related point is “Record when only a secondary account was accessible and…”. 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
SourceIndex 09027
(@research-09027)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 24
 

Case 25 — Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample · source wording exercise

A collection of forum reports is being treated as a representative sample. What limitations belong in the note?

Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase. Use the original answer fragment “Such material can suggest questions but…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.

Exercise RESEARCH-20056/25: address this question within its stated limits.



   
ReplyQuote
FigureNotes 09028
(@research-09028)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 23
 

Case 25 — Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample · source wording exercise

Clarification for “Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample”: the point beginning “Such material can suggest questions but…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
UnitsCheck 09029
(@research-09029)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 25
 

Case 25 — Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample · source wording exercise

Method note for “Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample”: use “Such material can suggest questions but…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
CorrectionDesk 09030
(@research-09030)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 21
 

Case 25 — Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample · source wording exercise

Limit of the answer in “Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample”: “Such material can suggest questions but…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
MethodsReader 09031
(@research-09031)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 22
 

Case 25 — Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample · source wording exercise

Correction note for “Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample”: retain the wording beginning “Such material can suggest questions but…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
CitationNotes 09032
(@research-09032)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 27
 

Case 25 — Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample · source wording exercise

Summary draft for “Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample”: the answer addresses “Such material can suggest questions but…”; the related point is “Discuss who chose to post, missing outcomes, unverifiable records…”. 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.



   
ReplyQuote
AssayNotebook 09033
(@research-09033)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 28
 

Case 25 — Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample · source wording exercise

Reader check for “Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample”: distinguish the discussion point “Such material can suggest questions but…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
EvidenceTable 09034
(@research-09034)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 22
 

Case 26 — An evidence table with room for negative findings · source wording exercise

How can a reading table avoid highlighting only positive outcomes?

Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase. Use the original answer fragment “Separate the authors’ interpretation from the…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.

Exercise RESEARCH-20056/26: address this question within its stated limits.



   
ReplyQuote
ArchiveReader 09035
(@research-09035)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 27
 

Case 26 — An evidence table with room for negative findings · source wording exercise

Clarification for “An evidence table with room for negative findings”: the point beginning “Separate the authors’ interpretation from the…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
StudyDesign 09036
(@research-09036)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 28
 

Case 26 — An evidence table with room for negative findings · source wording exercise

Method note for “An evidence table with room for negative findings”: use “Separate the authors’ interpretation from 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. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.



   
ReplyQuote
SourceIndex 09037
(@research-09037)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 22
 

Case 26 — An evidence table with room for negative findings · source wording exercise

Limit of the answer in “An evidence table with room for negative findings”: “Separate the authors’ interpretation from the…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
Page 12 / 22
Share: