Evidence · Preprints

[2026 update] Conference abstracts as evidence: the weakest common citation

Evidence › Preprints needs a source effect size preprint risk of bias

Closed

j.vogelTL2 Moderator7 Dec 2025#1

Conference abstracts as evidence: the weakest common citation — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable.

Comparing STEP 4 (JAMA, 2021) with SURMOUNT-4 (JAMA, 2024) and finding the comparison harder than it looks.

Different populations, different durations, different endpoints defined slightly differently, and in one case a different estimand. People compare the headline percentages anyway, including me until recently.

Is there a defensible way to put these side by side, or is the honest answer that there is not and we should stop?

21 likes 8mo

v.nascimentoTL2 Moderator13 Dec 2025#2

Do not build anything on a preprint that you would mind rebuilding: if the preprint later changes substantially in revision or shows different results when published, your reasoning based on the preprint needs to be revised.

3 likes 7mo

j.baptistaTL2 Moderator18 Dec 2025#3

Server repositories: medRxiv for medicine, bioRxiv for biology. Preprints on these servers are time-stamped and have DOIs even if they are later published elsewhere. Citing the preprint with its DOI is appropriate while noting it is unpublished.

0 likes 7mo

This topic was referenced in

How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work — the long versionEvidence › Preprints · 23 replies

This topic was closed 180 days after the last reply. Closing is automatic for quiet topics so that a settled answer does not collect new questions underneath it. If you have a follow-up, open a new topic and link back to this one — that keeps both readable and gives your question its own title.

Suggested topics

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
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
The "under review" status pill and when a moderator applies it — a second dataset Evidence › Preprints needs a source risk of bias preprint effect size The "under review" status pill and when a moderator applies it — a second dataset Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. I have seen SURPASS-4 ( Lancet , 2021)…	+50	54	1.4k	11mo
When a preprint is the best available evidence and we say so — a second dataset Evidence › Preprints preprint risk of bias needs a source Solved When a preprint is the best available evidence and we say so — a second dataset I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. I have seen SUSTAIN 6 ( N Engl J Med ,…	+20	24	36k	14mo
A preprint whose numbers changed substantially at publication — what changed since Evidence › Preprints risk of bias effect size needs a source On the subject in the title: A preprint whose numbers changed substantially at publication — what changed since Working notes rather than a conclusion. Session topic: STEP 2 ( Lancet , 2021). Please read it…	+3	7	125	8mo

Related topics — sharing the tags needs a source, effect size, preprint

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
SURMOUNT-4 and what withdrawal data does and does not tell an individual — one year on Compounds › Tirzepatide SURMOUNT programme randomised trial tirzepatide SURPASS programme Solved Closed Posting this under the heading it deserves: SURMOUNT-4 and what withdrawal data does and does not tell an individual — one year on Everything below is what sits behind that. Comparing SURPASS-2 ( N Engl J Med…	+122	136	48k	9mo
How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work — the long version Evidence › Preprints needs a source effect size risk of bias Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work — the long version I have seen SURMOUNT-1 ( N Engl J Med , 2022) cited in support of a…	+18	23	21k	2mo
Why cagrilintide alone is discussed so much less than in combination Compounds › Cagrilintide & amylin analogues effect size amylin analogues cagrisema Solved Closed Why cagrilintide alone is discussed so much less than in combination I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Session topic: SURMOUNT-OSA ( N Engl J Med ,…	+93	108	35k	16mo
When a network meta-analysis is defensible and when it is not Evidence › Meta-analyses effect size heterogeneity publication bias Solved When a network meta-analysis is defensible and when it is not I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Comparing SUSTAIN 6 ( N Engl J Med , 2016) with LEADER (…		2	27k	4h
Second pass at: Retatrutide mass and identity: what a report should show Compounds › Retatrutide retatrutide randomised trial effect size Solved Second pass at: Retatrutide mass and identity: what a report should show — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Comparing SURMOUNT-2 ( Lancet , 2023) with STEP 4 ( JAMA , 2021)…	+65	71	4.6k	13mo

Sponsored Sigma-Aldrich — certified reference materialsReference standards, analytical reagents and certified materials for method calibration. If you are validating a method, this is where the standard comes from.Reference standards →