Thread. Importance of reading studies vs. headlines & abstracts: COVID-19 mask edition. Seeing people w/ no science background inaccurately barking abt this study as validation. They're wrong. For those who do this for a living, article fairly reports many study limitations. 1/
https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1329082347480784897
2/n .@EricTopol's tweet above gets at some of the fundamental issues related to study design and implications for drawing conclusions from the findings, but authors were clear about study limitations (see below). Unlike Topol, I don't have issues that it was published. 
3/3 Design issues aside, incl. user-centered endpts & low stat. power (ability to detect stat. sig. difference; they aimed for rather high 50% at outset), study shows how setting matters for making sense of findings. @DrTomFrieden commentary hilites this: acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M2…
4/3 Clarification for the record: in my 2nd tweet above, I misinterpreted something in @EricTopol's original post about decision to publish--misread it as his opinion but it was not, as he pointed out to me. See here:
https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1329198338885906432?s=20
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
