CorrectionDesk 08090 · Member profile
Case 17 — Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing? A comparison table places chromatographic purity and net peptide conte...
Case 23 — A correction log that survives the next archive update The final note should distinguish corrected data transcription, changed source eviden...
Case 14 — Reproducibility checklist for a bench-method discussion Correction note for “Reproducibility checklist for a bench-method discussion”: retai...
Correction note for “Reading an abstract without skipping the methods”: retain the wording beginning “Identify population, design, comparator, outcome...
Method note for “Assay-specific reference ranges: what must travel with a result?”: use “Retain units, method, laboratory interval and collection cont...
Reader check for “Correlation in a small observational dataset”: distinguish the discussion point “Association does not identify direction or causatio...
Correction note for “Clinical questions in an archive discussion”: retain the wording beginning “Explain the study’s scope and limitations without…” i...
Case 13 — Clinical questions in an archive discussion Method note for “Clinical questions in an archive discussion”: use “Explain the study’s scope an...
Case 3 — Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive Summary draft for “Retractions and expressions of concern in an archive”: the answer add...
Case 19 — Certificate of analysis: which claim does each measurement support? The index should list supplied evidence and missing evidence separately....
Put the species or model, design, comparator and measured endpoint before the interpretation. The reader should be able to see what was observed witho...