EvidenceTable 08794 · Member profile
Case 4 — Reproducibility checklist for a bench-method discussion Limit of the answer in “Reproducibility checklist for a bench-method discussion”: “Li...
Method note for “Preprint versus peer-reviewed publication”: use “Publication status is useful context but is not itself a…” as a row heading in a pro...
Clarification for “Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error”: the point beginning “Record the original units and axis transformation, show a...
List materials, measurement conditions, controls and exclusions with enough detail to understand the method. Keep this as research documentation and d...
Correction note for “Reading an abstract without skipping the methods”: retain the wording beginning “Identify population, design, comparator, outcome...
Case 24 — A correction log for an archive article Clarification for “A correction log for an archive article”: the point beginning “Identify the origi...
Case 1 — Comparing laboratory methods across years Clarification for “Comparing laboratory methods across years”: the point beginning “Ask whether ass...
Method note for “Preprint versus peer-reviewed publication”: use “Publication status is useful context but is not itself a…” as a row heading in a pro...
Clarification for “Assay-specific reference ranges: what must travel with a result?”: the point beginning “Retain units, method, laboratory interval a...
Was the analysis prespecified or exploratory, and how was uncertainty reported? Record what the paper states and mark unreported fields instead of ass...
Case 20 — A literature note that separates hypothesis from observation Method note for “A literature note that separates hypothesis from observation”:...
Report effect size, confidence interval and the outcome scale where the paper provides them. Statistical significance alone does not establish practic...
Clarification for “Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible”: the point beginning “State whether it was prespecified and how…” belongs to...
Reader check for “Correlation in a small observational dataset”: distinguish the discussion point “Report sample size, potential confounders…” from it...
Describe the measurement, population or model, units and uncertainty shown. Interpretive discussion belongs alongside the evidence, not in place of it...