20 categories

Evidence

Published evidence, read closely. Trial digests, journal club, meta-analyses, preprints, and structured critique.

148 topics7,629 posts42 solved Moderators: s.leclerc, dr_okonkwo About this category

Trials 33 Journal club 47 Meta-analyses 24 Preprints 20 Study critique 24

148 topics

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
Journal club: SURMOUNT-1, read without the press release Evidence › Journal club journal club estimand randomised trial number needed to treat Journal club: SURMOUNT-1, read without the press release Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Session topic: STEP 1 ( N Engl J Med , 2021). Please read it before…	+139	157	66k	12mo
When a preprint is the best available evidence and we say so Evidence › Preprints risk of bias effect size preprint Solved When a preprint is the best available evidence and we say so — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. I have seen SURPASS-2 ( N Engl J Med , 2021) cited in…	+148	160	31k	11mo
Revisiting: Journal club: SURMOUNT-OSA and a hard endpoint in a soft field Evidence › Journal club estimand risk of bias number needed to treat Revisiting: Journal club: SURMOUNT-OSA and a hard endpoint in a soft field — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Comparing LEADER ( N Engl J Med , 2016) with SUSTAIN 6 ( N Engl…	+108	122	52k	7d
Measurement error in a self-reported exposure Evidence › Study critique confounding risk of bias effect size disputed Solved Closed Posting this under the heading it deserves: Measurement error in a self-reported exposure Everything below is what sits behind that. Session topic: SURPASS-2 ( N Engl J Med , 2021). Please read it before…	+117	129	45k	5mo
[2026 update] Journal club: SURPASS-2 and the semaglutide 1 mg comparator Evidence › Journal club estimand randomised trial number needed to treat effect size Journal club: SURPASS-2 and the semaglutide 1 mg comparator Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Session topic: SURPASS-4 ( Lancet , 2021). Please read it before…	+126	138	31k	17mo
Reading a trial's population section before its results — does this still hold? Evidence › Trials randomised trial open label intention to treat discontinuation & dropout Closed Reading a trial's population section before its results — does this still hold? I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. I have seen STEP 1 ( N Engl J Med ,…	+140	154	5.4k	14mo
Adjudicated events and why the definition matters — the long version Evidence › Trials intention to treat estimand randomised trial discontinuation & dropout Adjudicated events and why the definition matters — the long version Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Comparing SURPASS-4 ( Lancet , 2021) with STEP 4 ( JAMA…	+125	146	13k	15mo
Tracking a preprint to publication: a worked example Evidence › Preprints preprint risk of bias needs a source Tracking a preprint to publication: a worked example Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Session topic: STEP 1 ( N Engl J Med , 2021). Please read it before…	+133	147	15k	7mo
Journal club: orforglipron phase 2 and the non-peptide question Evidence › Journal club journal club estimand randomised trial Journal club: orforglipron phase 2 and the non-peptide question Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. I have seen SUSTAIN 6 ( N Engl J Med , 2016) cited in support…	+120	132	13k	1d
Journal club: SUSTAIN 6 and its retinopathy signal Evidence › Journal club estimand effect size risk of bias journal club Under review On the subject in the title: Journal club: SUSTAIN 6 and its retinopathy signal Working notes rather than a conclusion. I have seen SELECT ( N Engl J Med , 2023) cited in support of a claim I do not think it…	+110	122	46k	1d
Journal club: what we got wrong in an earlier session Evidence › Journal club number needed to treat effect size randomised trial journal club On the subject in the title: Journal club: what we got wrong in an earlier session Working notes rather than a conclusion. Session topic: SURMOUNT-1 ( N Engl J Med , 2022). Please read it before posting; the…	+114	125	2.5k	23h
Run-in periods and the population they select Evidence › Trials surrogate endpoints discontinuation & dropout estimand randomised trial On the subject in the title: Run-in periods and the population they select Working notes rather than a conclusion. Session topic: PIONEER 6 ( N Engl J Med , 2019). Please read it before posting; the…	+130	142	7.3k	1mo
Coming back to: Why a preprint's supplementary material is often the best part Evidence › Preprints risk of bias effect size preprint Under review Why a preprint's supplementary material is often the best part — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Comparing SURPASS-2 ( N Engl J Med , 2021) with STEP 4 (…	+109	116	36k	2d
Journal club: STEP 1 and the treatment-policy estimand — does this still hold? Evidence › Journal club risk of bias number needed to treat randomised trial Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: Journal club: STEP 1 and the treatment-policy estimand — does this still hold? Comparing STEP 2 ( Lancet , 2021) with SURMOUNT-4 ( JAMA , 2024) and…	+118	132	12k	15mo
Second pass at: Journal club: STEP 4 and what a withdrawal design can prove Evidence › Journal club number needed to treat risk of bias journal club effect size Second pass at: Journal club: STEP 4 and what a withdrawal design can prove Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Session topic: SURMOUNT-OSA ( N Engl J Med ,…	+81	90	54k	9mo
[2026 update] Journal club: is percentage weight change the right endpoint? Evidence › Journal club effect size risk of bias randomised trial Journal club: is percentage weight change the right endpoint? — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Comparing SURPASS-2 ( N Engl J Med , 2021) with…	+105	118	18k	11mo
A well-designed study with a badly written abstract Evidence › Study critique disputed effect size risk of bias observational data Posting this under the heading it deserves: A well-designed study with a badly written abstract Everything below is what sits behind that. Comparing SCALE ( N Engl J Med , 2015) with LEADER ( N Engl J Med ,…	+117	128	7.2k	14mo
Follow-up: Individual participant data versus aggregate data Evidence › Meta-analyses meta-analysis effect size publication bias heterogeneity Individual participant data versus aggregate data — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Comparing LEADER ( N Engl J Med , 2016) with SURPASS-4 ( Lancet , 2021) and finding the…	+101	111	23k	18mo
Citing a preprint in a maintained document: our rule and its reasoning — does this still hold? Evidence › Preprints preprint needs a source effect size Solved Under review The question in the title: Citing a preprint in a maintained document: our rule and its reasoning — does this still hold? I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. I have seen LEADER…	+103	115	24k	10mo
Journal club: is percentage weight change the right endpoint? Evidence › Journal club number needed to treat randomised trial journal club Solved Journal club: is percentage weight change the right endpoint? I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Comparing SURPASS-4 ( Lancet , 2021) with SURMOUNT-OSA (…	+116	120	23k	3mo
Reading a trial's population section before its results Evidence › Trials estimand surrogate endpoints discontinuation & dropout randomised trial Solved On the subject in the title: Reading a trial's population section before its results Working notes rather than a conclusion. I have seen STEP 2 ( Lancet , 2021) cited in support of a claim I do not think it…	+91	109	22k	2mo
The "under review" status pill and when a moderator applies it Evidence › Preprints risk of bias effect size preprint Posting this under the heading it deserves: The "under review" status pill and when a moderator applies it Everything below is what sits behind that. Session topic: SURMOUNT-4 ( JAMA , 2024). Please read it…	+96	119	17k	3mo
Reverse causation in a cohort study of weight and outcome — a second dataset Evidence › Study critique risk of bias observational data confounding Reverse causation in a cohort study of weight and outcome — a second dataset Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Session topic: SURMOUNT-OSA ( N Engl J Med ,…	+112	131	1.5k	10mo
Pooling trials with different estimands Evidence › Meta-analyses publication bias risk of bias effect size meta-analysis Solved On the subject in the title: Pooling trials with different estimands Working notes rather than a conclusion. Comparing SELECT ( N Engl J Med , 2023) with SURMOUNT-1 ( N Engl J Med , 2022) and finding the…	+120	132	2.3k	1d
Journal club: indirect comparison between two programmes, defended and attacked Evidence › Journal club journal club randomised trial number needed to treat risk of bias Journal club: indirect comparison between two programmes, defended and attacked Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Comparing SUSTAIN 6 ( N Engl J Med , 2016)…	+122	131	5.2k	just now
Random versus fixed effects: choosing rather than defaulting — a second dataset Evidence › Meta-analyses heterogeneity risk of bias publication bias On the subject in the title: Random versus fixed effects: choosing rather than defaulting — a second dataset Working notes rather than a conclusion. Session topic: STEP 2 ( Lancet , 2021). Please read it…	+95	106	20k	17mo
Preprint servers and what screening they do Evidence › Preprints preprint effect size needs a source Preprint servers and what screening they do — 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…	+95	106	5.6k	4mo
A preprint whose numbers changed substantially at publication Evidence › Preprints preprint needs a source effect size Wiki Closed A preprint whose numbers changed substantially at publication — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Session topic: SURMOUNT-2 ( Lancet , 2023). Please read it before posting;…	+90	95	21k	9mo
How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work Evidence › Preprints risk of bias effect size preprint needs a source How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. I have seen SCALE ( N Engl J Med , 2015) cited in support of a…	+112	119	1.3k	2y
Revisiting: What pooling buys you and what it destroys Evidence › Meta-analyses heterogeneity effect size publication bias Solved On the subject in the title: Revisiting: What pooling buys you and what it destroys Working notes rather than a conclusion. Session topic: PIONEER 6 ( N Engl J Med , 2019). Please read it before posting; the…	+97	107	4k	19h

Sponsored Janoshik Analytical — independent third-party testingHPLC purity and mass-spectrometric identity on submitted samples, reported with the method stated. The laboratory most often cited in this community’s verification records.Independent testing → Sponsored GL Biochem (Shanghai) Ltd. — synthesis, directFounded 1998. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, over 1,500 staff and 200-plus patents. Custom peptide synthesis and amino acid derivatives, with a batch certificate on every order.Custom synthesis →