Oh and Malcolm McLeod recently reweeted Neuroskeptic's "Should we ever conduct underpowered studies?" blog post, so he knows these claims of statistical significance is nonsense!
Screen snap that retweet before he removes it.
Oh and Malcolm McLeod recently reweeted Neuroskeptic's "Should we ever conduct underpowered studies?" blog post, so he knows these claims of statistical significance is nonsense!
Oh and Malcolm McLeod recently reweeted Neuroskeptic's "Should we ever conduct underpowered studies?" blog post, so he knows these claims of statistical significance is nonsense!
I think that - for reasons I don't pretend to understand - on the full 'desktop' version of the page it only seems to display two replies under each comment, making it look like any additional replies have been removed.
Hilarious going from write your study on the back of a cigarette pack to write it on a postage stampThis study is a doozy.. 120 potential participants, 12 started the study and 8, yes that's 8, completed it....
Anyone got alarm bells ringing yet....
"The Latin word "pace" is a form of "pax," meaning "peace" or "permission," and when used sincerely the word does indeed suggest a desire for both".
Oh the irony.
take your pick:Hmm, how do you say 'pile of shite' in Latin?
It's the expectation that subjective outcomes are sufficient that rang the alarm bell...
If their followup trial doesn't include objective outcomes then it is a complete waste of time.
13 separate comparisons, so correcting for multiple comparisons (p<(0.05/13)), none of the findings were significant. It's an n=8 feasibility study without a control group, claims about statistical significance are simply nonsense."Although the statistical power of this study was limited, there was significant improvement in fatigue severity."
Oh and Malcolm McLeod recently reweeted Neuroskeptic's "Should we ever conduct underpowered studies?" blog post, so he knows these claims of statistical significance is nonsense!
Andrew Gelman blog said:It’s not always clear what people mean by this expression, but sometimes it seems that they’re making the “What does not kill my statistical significance makes it stronger” fallacy, thinking that the attainment of statistical significance is a particular feat in the context of a noisy study, so that they’re (mistakenly) thinking of the “limited statistical power” of that study as a further point in favor of their argument.
"Proluvies" just sounds right doesn't it.take your pick:
excrementum, stercus, proluvies, umor praefandus, humor praefandus, execramentum:
eta: maybe we should call PACE supporters proluvies?
Hmm, how do you say 'pile of shite' in Latin?
also the collective noun for weasels is a sneak of weasels...........how appropriate."Proluvies" just sounds right doesn't it.
"That paper reads like its been written by a right bunch of Proluvies" etc.
"The Latin word "pace" is a form of "pax," meaning "peace" or "permission," and when used sincerely the word does indeed suggest a desire for both".
Oh the irony.
I forget my Latin but is not "pace" the ablative, singular-making that by, with or from peace.
We must assume that in this context "from peace" is the most appropriate,(by or with peace being clearly ruled out)-but I am not entirely sure it bears that nuance. We must have an expert.somewhere.
What a bore that man can be.
I think that it would have been generally understood that I was referring to myself as a bore. I'll leave you to it then.
mea culpa
Hmm, how do you say 'pile of shite' in Latin?