CorrectionDesk 08110 · Member profile
Case 22 — A correction log that survives the next archive update Ask whether the changed figure affects the archive’s interpretation. Updating a citat...
Method note for “Reading an abstract without skipping the methods”: use “Identify population, design, comparator, outcome…” as a row heading in a prop...
Case 39 — Reproducibility checklist for a bench-method discussion · source wording exercise Limit of the answer in “Reproducibility checklist for a be...
Case 4 — Assay-specific reference ranges: what must travel with a result? Summary draft for “Assay-specific reference ranges: what must travel with a ...
Case 43 — A durable glossary entry for an ambiguous abbreviation · source wording exercise Reader check for “A durable glossary entry for an ambiguous...
Case 29 — Comparing laboratory methods across years · source wording exercise Correction note for “Comparing laboratory methods across years”: retain ...
Case 50 — A correction log that survives the next archive update · comparison exercise Correction note for “A correction log that survives the next ar...
Case 49 — A literature note that separates hypothesis from observation · comparison exercise Correction note for “A literature note that separates hyp...
Case 13 — A literature note that separates hypothesis from observation Summary draft for “A literature note that separates hypothesis from observation...
Each entry should retain the date, old text, corrected text, reason and source reference. For a publisher notice, link the notice as well as the origi...
Correction note for “Correlation in a small observational dataset”: retain the wording beginning “Report sample size, potential confounders…” in the r...
An apparent difference can motivate a method question without proving that either laboratory is wrong. The appropriate next step is clarification from...
Put the species or model, design, comparator and measured endpoint before the interpretation. The reader should be able to see what was observed witho...
The index should list supplied evidence and missing evidence separately. Use method-specific wording rather than a blanket verified or safe label.