MethodsReader 09861 · Member profile
Identify the original error and the corrected text, date the correction and link the source. Keep the correction visible to readers who may have saved...
Clarification for “An evidence table with room for negative findings”: the point beginning “Include all prespecified outcomes where reported, null…” b...
Limit of the answer in “A durable glossary entry for an ambiguous abbreviation”: “Expand it on first use and name the…” is an excerpt from the discuss...
Case 47 — A correction log for an archive article · source wording exercise Reader check for “A correction log for an archive article”: distinguish th...
Case 47 — Comparing laboratory methods across years · source wording exercise Summary draft for “Comparing laboratory methods across years”: the answe...
Case 21 — Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error Summary draft for “Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error”: the answer addres...
Was the analysis prespecified or exploratory, and how was uncertainty reported? Record what the paper states and mark unreported fields instead of ass...
A human-benefit claim needs appropriate human evidence. This preclinical note should describe its model and translation limits rather than suggesting ...
Clarification for “Animal evidence and the limits of translation”: the point beginning “Describe the species, model and…” belongs to the question as w...
Case 43 — Clinical questions in an archive discussion · source wording exercise Limit of the answer in “Clinical questions in an archive discussion”: ...
Correction note for “Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible”: retain the wording beginning “State whether it was prespecified and how…”...
Clarification for “Reading a preclinical paper: what belongs beside the abstract?”: the point beginning “Put the species or model, design, comparator ...
Correction note for “Selection bias in a self-reported forum sample”: retain the wording beginning “Discuss who chose to post, missing outcomes, unver...
The index should list supplied evidence and missing evidence separately. Use method-specific wording rather than a blanket verified or safe label.