(Addendum - "twice as likely to develop a thing" is also a bit misleading, since you don't know what chance is being doubled)
-
-
En réponse à @ChrisWarcraft
And you shouldn't simply add the self-selected sample w/ the larger, random(ish?) sample to produce data, either.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 0 j'aime -
En réponse à @erscimia
correct, but considering the methodology was "played football," and the rest of those brains are from football players, I think
1 réponse 0 Retweet 0 j'aime -
En réponse à @ChrisWarcraft @erscimia
it's still a fair comparison to make. Ideally you'd want every football player's brain who ever played to test.
3 réponses 0 Retweet 0 j'aime -
En réponse à @ChrisWarcraft
The data on these brains is very important. But the larger, random sample alone is likely to be closer to a "true" NFL CTE percentage...
1 réponse 0 Retweet 0 j'aime
En réponse à @erscimia
Totally agree, and I wish we had that data.
11:00 - 25 juil. 2017
0 réponse
0 Retweet
1 j'aime
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.