Some point out that *some* of the point estimates are consistent....
And, imagine a second what happens if...
2. You pick a question where there is a broader range of preconceived notions (e.g. does the IVC filter help? Is saturated fat good or bad?)
3 You don't have analytic teams review each other
5. You let anyone put out a press release without any accountability
6. You place no restrictions on analysis plan
7. There can be far more than 29 teams
8. Pre-registration is <100%
Almost surely this will translate into greater VARIATION
Some questions using retrospective data with strong preconceived notions are likely little more than self fulfilling prophecy
I think I read the entire book on 2 flights from PDX to Europe
It was that riveting
Read my longer take here:
We love to use these for regulatory approval (2/3 of all our drugs)
In part because he rips this awful field--- and it is awful, with endless press releases of low credibility-- into tiny bits but also because of what follows.
RCT is mandatory here
2 paired papers linked first responders with incr. myeloma and all cancer
Does not deserve any tax breaks IMHO.
What do you need to know?
Because doctors in the USA and elsewhere already think they know the answer and are unwilling to randomize their patients, and.... they are making money hand over fist from the status quo.