I'm not trying to jab your integrity, I just find it endlessly confusing that people will criticize evidence at length but ignore those selfsame issues in other research. Either you find large CoIs a problem, or you don't. Can't have it both ways!
-
-
Replying to @GidMK @MacroFour and
Just like “Grade C evidence is enough doesn’t matter what the outcome is?” That is a “jab at my integrity” bc you are misrepresenting what I am about.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @WeDietitians @MacroFour and
Indeed. Grade C evidence is sufficient where more rigorous evidence is impossible/extremely hard to generate, regardless of the outcome of interest
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @MacroFour and
If an intervention does not achieve its objective (outcome) do it anyway?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @WeDietitians @MacroFour and
Not at all what I said. It is rare that you can delineate evidence so easily into yes/no on whether it works or not, which is where grading comes in
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @MacroFour and
Gid, “Grade C evidence is sufficient ....regardless of the outcome of interest” It’s that last bit....”regardless of outcome”....why intervene then if the outcome doesn’t matter?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @WeDietitians @MacroFour and
I am again confused. Obviously we care about the outcomes, the point is that grade C evidence can be applied to a diverse range of settings because it is an assessment of evidential backing
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @MacroFour and
You and me both buddy! So if an intervention isn’t achieving its objective (eg ADG, Grade C) “just keep going bc Grade C is a good as we are ever going to get”?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @WeDietitians @MacroFour and
Grade C? So you have a large, well-conducted systematic review of similarly rigorous observational trials demonstrating that populations with ADG are worse off than populations without? I'd be fascinated to see it. Seriously, sounds like an amazing study
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @MacroFour and
Gid, I'm trying to clarify your statement. Observational studies aren't really a "trial"as there is no intervention such as an RCT. Nations who have national food guidelines (mostly OECD nations) were ahead in food-related chronic disease.pic.twitter.com/WOLBnbHwD0
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Your words - "an intervention isn’t achieving its objective (eg ADG, Grade C)" Grade C evidence is either a large number of observational trials pointing in the same direction + weak RCTs, or a large SR/MA with strong conclusions. I'd simply like to see this evidence
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.