StudyDesign 06716 · Member profile
Limit of the answer in “Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together”: “Keep the source citation, retrieval date and a…” is an exc...
Discuss who chose to post, missing outcomes, unverifiable records and changes in reporting over time. Such material can suggest questions but cannot e...
Clarification for “An evidence table with room for negative findings”: the point beginning “Include all prespecified outcomes where reported, null…” b...
Case 7 — Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources Summary draft for “Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary so...
Correction note for “A durable glossary entry for an ambiguous abbreviation”: retain the wording beginning “Expand it on first use and name the…” in t...
Case 9 — Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample A collection of forum reports is being treated as a representative sample. What limitations be...
Method note for “A correction log for an archive article”: use “Identify the original error and the corrected text, date…” as a row heading in a propo...
Case 21 — Correlation in a small observational dataset Correction note for “Correlation in a small observational dataset”: retain the wording beginnin...
Case 19 — Confidence intervals: describe uncertainty explicitly Limit of the answer in “Confidence intervals: describe uncertainty explicitly”: “Repor...
Case 8 — Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample Limit of the answer in “Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample”: “Discuss who chose to...
Reader check for “Confidence intervals: describe uncertainty explicitly”: distinguish the discussion point “Report effect size, confidence interval an...
Case 40 — Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing? · source wording exercise Correction note for “Two laboratories, two p...
Describe the measurement, population or model, units and uncertainty shown. Interpretive discussion belongs alongside the evidence, not in place of it...