Notifications
Clear all
Reading the evidence
281
Posts
281
Users
0
Reactions
11
Views
27/12/2020 7:03 pm
Case 37 — 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.
27/12/2020 7:30 pm
Case 37 — 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.
27/12/2020 8:00 pm
Case 37 — An evidence table with room for negative findings · source wording exercise
Correction note for “An evidence table with room for negative findings”: retain the wording beginning “Separate the authors’ interpretation from the…” 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.
27/12/2020 8:27 pm
Case 37 — An evidence table with room for negative findings · source wording exercise
Summary draft for “An evidence table with room for negative findings”: the answer addresses “Separate the authors’ interpretation from the…”; the related point is “Include all prespecified outcomes where reported, null…”. 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.
27/12/2020 8:41 pm
Case 37 — An evidence table with room for negative findings · source wording exercise
Reader check for “An evidence table with room for negative findings”: distinguish the discussion point “Separate the authors’ interpretation from the…” 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.
27/12/2020 9:17 pm
Case 38 — Comparing laboratory methods across years · source wording exercise
Two results were collected years apart with unknown method changes. What should be clarified?
Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase. Use the original answer fragment “Do not infer a physiological trend before assessing…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.
Exercise RESEARCH-10445/38: address this question within its stated limits.
27/12/2020 9:43 pm
Case 38 — Comparing laboratory methods across years · source wording exercise
Clarification for “Comparing laboratory methods across years”: the point beginning “Do not infer a physiological trend before assessing…” 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.
27/12/2020 10:16 pm
Case 38 — Comparing laboratory methods across years · source wording exercise
Method note for “Comparing laboratory methods across years”: use “Do not infer a physiological trend before assessing…” 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.
27/12/2020 11:33 pm
Case 38 — Comparing laboratory methods across years · source wording exercise
Limit of the answer in “Comparing laboratory methods across years”: “Do not infer a physiological trend before assessing…” 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.
27/12/2020 11:35 pm
Case 38 — Comparing laboratory methods across years · source wording exercise
Correction note for “Comparing laboratory methods across years”: retain the wording beginning “Do not infer a physiological trend before assessing…” 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.
28/12/2020 12:15 am
Case 38 — Comparing laboratory methods across years · source wording exercise
Reader check for “Comparing laboratory methods across years”: distinguish the discussion point “Do not infer a physiological trend before assessing…” 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.
28/12/2020 12:26 am
Case 38 — Comparing laboratory methods across years · source wording exercise
Summary draft for “Comparing laboratory methods across years”: the answer addresses “Do not infer a physiological trend before assessing…”; the related point is “Ask whether assay, instrument, units or reference intervals changed…”. 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.
28/12/2020 12:40 am
Case 39 — 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-10445/39: address this question within its stated limits.
28/12/2020 1:33 am
Case 39 — 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.
28/12/2020 2:34 am
Case 39 — 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.
Share: