[Meta] the FLOW rule is doing its job and people should stop complaining
the FLOW rule is doing its job and people should stop complaining. This affects how posts get sorted and removed, so it belongs in the open.
The discontinuation numbers were the most useful thing in the paper for me and they were in a supplementary table.
Compared myself to a trial mean for about six months before realising the trial arm had dietitian contact every fortnight.
Started keeping the trial identifiers straight in a note file because I kept mixing up two programmes in the same sentence.
Sceptical readings welcome. The confident ones are the ones I distrust.
best — the order this archive was captured in
A confidence interval is the range of effects compatible with the data. Two trials with overlapping intervals have not disagreed, whatever their point estimates look like next to each other.
Not convinced. Cross-trial comparison between two programmes with different populations and designs is not a comparison.
Not convinced.
Disagreeing with this line: that is a relative reduction and the absolute numbers are considerably less dramatic.
Intention-to-treat analyses everybody randomised regardless of what they did afterwards. Completer analyses only those who finished. The second is systematically more flattering and both are legitimate if labelled.
Discontinuation rates are a tolerability result. A trial with a strong efficacy number and heavy discontinuation is telling you two things and people only quote one.