People who are fans of a technology, methodology or approach serve as cheerleaders even for flawed papers/preprints because they give result that fits desired narrative.
"Congratulations on an excellent job"
This leads those who are less savvy to believe that the paper/preprint is indeed excellent.
Given many people get their news from media outlets who may frame the tone based on what KOLs are tweeting, this may distort priorities by docs, scientists and most powerfully the general public and policy makers.
I was reminded today that with all of the discussion about cardiac MRI, many folks may get the wrong idea about the test and when it is useful.
Let's do a mini thread on this!
Cardiac MRI (CMR) is an excellent and cost effective test when used appropriately. It can be among the lowest cost cardiac imaging tests and it delivers high quality images with very good record of accuracy and safety.
So what are some of the indications (applications) of CMR in medicine?
Dear all, after a week or two of serious illness a respiratory illness can leave residual lung abnormalities (permanent or slowly resolving), loss of skeletal muscle (from lying in bed mostly, rarely from viral myositis), and in rare cases heart dysfunction.
Cardiac MRI is *not* the way to tease these apart.
Far more helpful could be exercise testing. This will help confirm the degree of limitation and whether there is an arrhythmic risk at high exercise levels.
It is an approach commonly used in patients with heart failure or recent heart attacks to determine how much exercise is safe for them to do while they are rehabilitating.
First, this is an example of data reuse from RCTs (in this case BARI-2D). Data are made available by @nih_nhlbi through BioLINCC repository. Some paperwork is required to ensure patient privacy, etc but process is usually straightforward & quick:
We decided to examine CARDIA cohort (Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults), sponsored by @nih_nhlbi ~30 yrs ago to study black & white men & women age 18-30, followed serially for 30 yrs (though we only had 25 yr data for this analysis)