-
-
Show this thread
-
The main issue is that the headline is based on a subgroup analysis that showed that people with diabetes and NASH/NAFLD were at a higher risk of serious liver outcomes than people with no diabetespic.twitter.com/loLsIV5OBv
Show this thread -
Two problems here: 1. The absolute risk increase for HCC/cirrhosis and diabetes vs no diabetes was ~0.06% 2. This was a small subgroup analysis in a much larger study, not nearly as rigorous as the main findings
Show this thread -
It's hard to get the exact figures, but it seems like this subgroup analysis was based off a very small proportion of the total sample (people with diabetes, HCC/cirrhosis, AND NAFLD/NASH information available)
Show this thread -
Talking about this as a study in 18 million people is just factually incorrect, but the complexities of why that is are really hard to grasp
Show this thread -
IMO you'd need at least a solid understanding of epidemiology and NAFLD/NASH to even read this study, can't see how a journalist without that background is meant to dopic.twitter.com/hcjbMiM0e2
Show this thread -
My guess is that most of the copy was taken almost word-for-word from the press release Not ideal journalism? Maybe. But what else are they meant to do, start an MPH?
Show this thread -
For more background on this issue, read
@chrisdc77's mega-thread and linked paper on press releases and their importance in science communication to the mediahttps://twitter.com/chrisdc77/status/1130250993973846017 …Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.