Topic summary

Coming back to: Measurement error in a self-reported exposure

Evidence › Study critique risk of bias observational data effect size disputed

This is a generated summary. It shows the 5 most-liked posts from a topic of 28, in their original order, with the accepted answer included where one exists. It is a reading aid and it will miss nuance — the full topic is the record.

h.bhattacharyaTL2 Moderator21 Apr 2026#8

buffer_review, post #7: Defending a paper against criticism: if the authors respond, they might clarify something the paper explained poorly. Their response might also miss your point. Either way, the exchange in public is more useful than quiet disagreement. Go to post

Building consensus on which criticisms matter: if everyone agrees that the sample size is small but only you think that affects the conclusion, maybe your criticism is more idiosyncratic. That does not make it wrong but it is worth noticing.

22 likes in reply to #7 3mo

ThibodeauTL3Regular22 Apr 2026#11

Multiple comparisons: if a paper reports many outcomes, the chance of a spurious association by random chance is real. Pre-specification of primary outcomes matters and secondary analyses are weaker evidence.

32 likes 3mo

CSagredoTL3Regular24 Apr 2026#15

This follows post #12 rather than contradicting it.

I disagree with the reply above, and I think the disagreement is substantive rather than terminological.

The distinction being drawn does not survive when you look at the published data for this specific question. I would be glad to be shown wrong on this, because the version I am arguing against is more convenient.

24 likes 3mo

f.fontaineTL2 Moderator27 Apr 2026#22

Picking up post #19: that is the part I would want checked first.

Bias towards the null and bias away from the null: different criticisms have different directions. Differential dropout might bias away from null; conservative statistical analysis might bias toward null.

24 likes 3mo

c.balogunTL2 Moderator28 Apr 2026#26

This follows post #23 rather than contradicting it.

I disagree with the reply above, and I think the disagreement is substantive rather than terminological.

32 likes 3mo

Read the full topic (28 posts)

Suggested topics

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
A structured critique template this community uses Evidence › Study critique observational data effect size risk of bias A structured critique template this community uses — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Comparing SURMOUNT-2 ( Lancet , 2023) with SURPASS-4 ( Lancet , 2021) and finding the…		2	18k	1d
About the Study critique category Evidence › Study critique risk of bias confounding observational data Pinned Wiki Structured criticism of a specific published study. Criticise the method, not the author. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded with its…		4	114	16mo
Selection into a registry and what it does to the estimate Evidence › Study critique risk of bias disputed observational data Selection into a registry and what it does to the estimate — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Session topic: STEP 4 ( JAMA , 2021). Please read it before posting; the…		2	55k	7mo
Selection into a registry and what it does to the estimate — a second dataset Evidence › Study critique confounding risk of bias effect size disputed Solved Posting this under the heading it deserves: Selection into a registry and what it does to the estimate — a second dataset Everything below is what sits behind that. Session topic: SURMOUNT-4 ( JAMA , 2024).…	+28	32	1.3k	1d
Immortal time bias in a claims-database study Evidence › Study critique risk of bias observational data disputed confounding Closed Immortal time bias in a claims-database study — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. I have seen FLOW ( N Engl J Med , 2024) cited in support of a claim I do not think it…	+29	34	28k	11mo

Related topics — sharing the tags risk of bias, observational data, effect size

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
Journal club: semaglutide in MASH, and surrogate endpoints — does this still hold? Evidence › Journal club estimand randomised trial number needed to treat effect size Solved Closed Journal club: semaglutide in MASH, and surrogate endpoints — does this still hold? I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Comparing STEP 1 ( N Engl J Med ,…		3	28k	6mo
Confounding by indication, explained with a concrete example Evidence › Study critique confounding observational data disputed On the subject in the title: Confounding by indication, explained with a concrete example Working notes rather than a conclusion. Comparing SURMOUNT-1 ( N Engl J Med , 2022) with SURPASS-2 ( N Engl J Med ,…	+21	25	21k	11mo
Risk-of-bias tools and the judgement they conceal Evidence › Meta-analyses meta-analysis heterogeneity publication bias effect size Wiki Risk-of-bias tools and the judgement they conceal Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. I have seen STEP 1 ( N Engl J Med , 2021) cited in support of a claim I do…	+8	12	21k	11mo
Coming back to: Prediction intervals and why they are more honest than confidence intervals Evidence › Meta-analyses publication bias heterogeneity effect size risk of bias Prediction intervals and why they are more honest than confidence intervals Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Comparing SURMOUNT-OSA ( N Engl J Med , 2024)…		2	65	22mo
Journal club: STEP 3 and the intensive behavioural therapy floor — does this still hold? Evidence › Journal club journal club effect size number needed to treat Solved The question in the title: Journal club: STEP 3 and the intensive behavioural therapy floor — does this still hold? I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. Session topic: STEP 4 (…		2	15k	10mo