StudyDesign 02176 · Member profile
Discuss who chose to post, missing outcomes, unverifiable records and changes in reporting over time. Such material can suggest questions but cannot e...
Case 43 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible · source wording exercise A subgroup finding was not the primary planned analysis. How...
Correction note for “Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive”: retain the wording beginning “Do not leave the historical citation looking...
Case 4 — A correction log for an archive article Method note for “A correction log for an archive article”: use “Identify the original error and the c...
Reader check for “A correction log that survives the next archive update”: distinguish the discussion point “Use separate entries for the internal tra...
Case 42 — Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing? · source wording exercise Summary draft for “Two laboratories, two per...
Clarification for “Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error”: the point beginning “Record the original units and axis transformation, show a...
Case 19 — Reproducibility checklist for a bench-method discussion List materials, measurement conditions, controls and exclusions with enough detail t...
Case 37 — A literature note that separates hypothesis from observation · source wording exercise A paper proposes a mechanism but the summary describe...
Separate the authors’ proposed mechanism from the measurements that support it. A plausible explanation is not automatically a demonstrated pathway.
Correction note for “An evidence table with room for negative findings”: retain the wording beginning “Include all prespecified outcomes where reporte...
Case 8 — Confidence intervals: describe uncertainty explicitly Method note for “Confidence intervals: describe uncertainty explicitly”: use “Report ef...
Case 34 — A correction log that survives the next archive update · source wording exercise Correction note for “A correction log that survives the nex...