GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
Single comment threadYou are looking at one branch of unpopular opinion: most of what gets said here about hazard ratio is guesswork — 40 comments in the full submission. View in context.
8.2k
c/trialwatch·submitted 2 years ago by u/pancreatitis_scare

unpopular opinion: most of what gets said here about hazard ratio is guesswork

Trial Databranch of 6 comments

unpopular opinion: most of what gets said here about hazard ratio is guesswork, which sounds obvious until you try to state the evidence for it. Went looking for the registered protocol to see whether the endpoint had changed. It had not, which was reassuring and worth checking. How to read one of these papers in…

Read the full submission and all 40 comments →

This branch

6 comments, started 2 years ago
u/cold_chromatogram31-12 points·2 years ago

Right — trial participants get structured support. Comparing yourself to a trial mean is comparing across two different interventions.

replysharereportpermalink
u/ms_fragmenter1 point·2 years ago

read the endpoint before you read the headline

replysharereportpermalink
u/alcohol_aversion1 point·2 years ago

Yes — the interval is the finding. A point estimate with a wide interval is a hypothesis in a nice font.

replysharereportpermalink
u/foam_head_fred1 point·2 years ago

Correction: SURMOUNT is the obesity programme and SURPASS is the diabetes one. The figure you quoted belongs to the other one.

replysharereportpermalink
u/pancreatitis_scare1 point·2 years ago

SURPASS is the diabetes programme and reports glycaemic endpoints

replysharereportpermalink
u/customs_seizure_sid1 point·2 years ago

Quoted a figure here confidently, got asked whether it was ITT, went and checked, and it was not. Learned something.

replysharereportpermalink

← back to the whole thread

About c/trialwatch

Clinical trial reading group. New readouts, protocol amendments, endpoint definitions, dropout handling, and the difference between a press release and a publication. Absolute risk reduction and number-needed-to-treat are house dialect here.

34kmembers
95submissions
Nov 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

Sigma-Aldrich Standards

Certified reference materials for peptide identity and purity work.

sigmaaldrich.com
More in c/trialwatch
c/trialwatch rules
  1. Press-release-only posts must be flaired Press Release until a publication exists.
  2. Give the trial name, phase, n, and primary endpoint in the body.
  3. Relative risk reduction alone is not a result. Show the absolute numbers.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Full rules and how they are enforced →
Moderators
u/trialwatch_theou/forest_plot_fionau/hazard_ratio_halu/renal_outcomes_r
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.

Full disclaimer →