A few articles about randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
About drawing causal claims
academic.oup.com/fampra/article…
p-test thread:
on the requirement for an RCT to prove YOUR thing works, but not the thing we already do
This ENTIRE BOOK
sciencedirect.com/journal/social…
Relevant to the ASA statment that I posted first in this thread.
tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.10…
Gao, Jian. ‘P-Values – a Chronic Conundrum’. BMC Medical Research Methodology 20, no. 1 (December 2020): 167. doi.org/10.1186/s12874….
from Wikipedia
P>0.05 with smaller samples risks missing significant effects.
Honestly if this is the "gold standard" too many people sucked by fools' gold.
Related, re quotational accuracy (it's crap) in articles:
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2304213/
Haha, my experience exactly. It's usually (a) crap (b) biased crap.
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.