The Peptide CommonsEst. May 2024
Independent. We sell nothing and are affiliated with no manufacturer or pharmacy. Every moderation action is logged in public
Tags · Evidence

risk of bias

Structured appraisal of internal validity.

83 topics 21 solved Group: Evidence

Related in this group: STEP programme · SURMOUNT programme · SURPASS programme · SELECT trial · FLOW trial · SOUL trial · TRIUMPH programme · PIONEER programme · SUSTAIN programme · LEADER trial · randomised trial · meta-analysis

83 topics · page 3 of 3

TopicParticipantsRepliesViewsActivity
A claim built entirely on a subgroup analysis
A claim built entirely on a subgroup analysis 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 of a claim I do…
ASKHMIASNP+71 80 1.1k 14mo
A well-designed study with a badly written abstract
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 ,…
RCMICBMRPN+117 128 7.2k 14mo
Critiquing an observational claim about a class effect
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Critiquing an observational claim about a class effect Everything below is what sits behind that. Session topic: SCALE ( N Engl J Med , 2015). Please read it before…
VRRIJV 2 6.9k 14mo
Coming back to: A critique that turned out to be unfair, retracted by its author
A critique that turned out to be unfair, retracted by its author — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. I have seen STEP 4 ( JAMA , 2021) cited in support of a claim I do not…
IAQLJB 2 1.3k 14mo
Criticising the method without criticising the authors
Criticising the method without criticising the authors 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…
KBZOKOJMTV+55 61 60k 15mo
Journal club: STEP 4 and what a withdrawal design can prove — one year on
Journal club: STEP 4 and what a withdrawal design can prove — one year on 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 , 2024).…
TDSVOFSOCT+56 62 34k 15mo
Journal club: STEP 1 and the treatment-policy estimand — does this still hold?
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…
MDAWRMJDVR+118 132 12k 15mo
Follow-up: Journal club: the retatrutide phase 2 obesity paper
On the subject in the title: Journal club: the retatrutide phase 2 obesity paper Working notes rather than a conclusion. I have seen SURMOUNT-1 ( N Engl J Med , 2022) cited in support of a claim I do not…
NDNRRRSIS+20 24 8.7k 16mo
Journal club: SUSTAIN 6 and its retinopathy signal — does this still hold?
The question in the title: Journal club: SUSTAIN 6 and its retinopathy signal — does this still hold? I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. I have seen SURMOUNT-2 ( Lancet ,…
RONSPPSDOB+60 66 12k 16mo
About the Study critique category
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…
BNJNDEHF 4 114 16mo
Journal club: SURMOUNT-OSA and a hard endpoint in a soft field
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Journal club: SURMOUNT-OSA and a hard endpoint in a soft field Everything below is what sits behind that. Comparing SURMOUNT-4 ( JAMA , 2024) with SCALE ( N Engl J…
CIRCBPMN+47 51 617 16mo
Coming back to: Reading a meta-analysis you disagree with, fairly
Reading a meta-analysis you disagree with, fairly 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…
TVBDJIPMCT+30 34 9.3k 17mo
Random versus fixed effects: choosing rather than defaulting — a second dataset
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…
NCJVSDBSEF+95 106 20k 17mo
A claim built entirely on a subgroup analysis — what changed since
On the subject in the title: A claim built entirely on a subgroup analysis — what changed since Working notes rather than a conclusion. I have seen PIONEER 6 ( N Engl J Med , 2019) cited in support of a claim…
AWZCQZ 2 2k 18mo
A well-designed study with a badly written abstract — does this still hold?
A well-designed study with a badly written abstract — 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 , 2021)…
ENCEKA 2 28k 20mo
Second pass at: When a network meta-analysis is defensible and when it is not
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Second pass at: When a network meta-analysis is defensible and when it is not Everything below is what sits behind that. Comparing STEP 8 ( JAMA , 2022) with LEADER…
LSOID 2 2.8k 21mo
Journal club: SURPASS-2 and the semaglutide 1 mg comparator
On the subject in the title: Journal club: SURPASS-2 and the semaglutide 1 mg comparator Working notes rather than a conclusion. Session topic: SELECT ( N Engl J Med , 2023). Please read it before posting;…
CRGBQLANFR+71 76 52k 21mo
Tracking a preprint to publication: a worked example — the long version
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Tracking a preprint to publication: a worked example — the long version Everything below is what sits behind that. Comparing STEP 8 ( JAMA , 2022) with STEP 2 (…
PBHJEFAKGC+38 47 560 22mo
Coming back to: Prediction intervals and why they are more honest than confidence intervals
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)…
TDIBB 2 65 22mo
Why a preprint's supplementary material is often the best part
Why a preprint's supplementary material is often the best part I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Session topic: SUSTAIN 6 ( N Engl J Med , 2016). Please…
SCTWJSMSH+38 42 863 22mo
Reading a meta-analysis you disagree with, fairly
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Reading a meta-analysis you disagree with, fairly Everything below is what sits behind that. I have seen SURPASS-2 ( N Engl J Med , 2021) cited in support of a…
SOHNPOLASD+7 13 2.5k 23mo
How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work
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…
DVDHKTFWV+112 119 1.3k 2y
Journal club: FLOW and the renal composite, component by component
On the subject in the title: Journal club: FLOW and the renal composite, component by component Working notes rather than a conclusion. Session topic: STEP 2 ( Lancet , 2021). Please read it before posting;…
ACNNZLHEAW+84 91 18k 2y