Notifications
Clear all
Reading the evidence
9
Posts
9
Users
0
Reactions
1
Views
Topic starter
03/07/2018 1:20 pm
An animal experiment is cited as though it establishes a human outcome. What qualification is required?
| Field | Scope |
|---|---|
| Subject | Animal evidence and the limits of translation |
| Exercise | Discuss the stated question; distinguish sources, interpretations and unresolved points. |
03/07/2018 2:43 pm
Describe the species, model and outcome actually studied. Differences in biology and study conditions limit translation; the finding is not a clinical recommendation.
03/07/2018 3:02 pm
Clarification for “Animal evidence and the limits of translation”: the point beginning “Describe the species, model 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: scope. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.
03/07/2018 3:40 pm
Limit of the answer in “Animal evidence and the limits of translation”: “Describe the species, model 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: scope. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.
03/07/2018 3:50 pm
Method note for “Animal evidence and the limits of translation”: use “Describe the species, model 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. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.
03/07/2018 4:14 pm
Correction note for “Animal evidence and the limits of translation”: retain the wording beginning “Describe the species, model 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. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.
03/07/2018 4:58 pm
Summary draft for “Animal evidence and the limits of translation”: the answer addresses “Describe the species, model and…”; the related point is “Differences in biology and study conditions limit translation; the…”. 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.
03/07/2018 5:32 pm
Reader check for “Animal evidence and the limits of translation”: distinguish the discussion point “Describe the species, model 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: scope. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.
03/07/2018 5:46 pm
Clarification for “Animal evidence and the limits of translation”: the point beginning “Differences in biology and study conditions limit translation; 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: scope. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.
Share: