Now I have surveyed the entirity of the met analyses on homeopathy, and yes, everything else is either quite out of date, or far worse (shang and the NHMRC for instance)
Here we go, this is much more similar. Re-ran the model exponentiating differently. Looks like their basic analysis probably wasn't an error, although in the process I've found at least 2 minor numerical errors in the paper so it's a very mixed bagpic.twitter.com/HaxipIKC8F
-
-
Were thes minor numerical errors sufficient to affect the results?
-
Hard to tell without doing a truly annoying amount of work. Sadly, I definitely don't have time. At a guess, I'd say probably not
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Ok now you’re going to have to talk very slowly health nerdy to me so I can understand the differences here. Very, very slowly as just back from enjoying a very nice Four Winds IPA over dinner.
-
Basically, my initial meta analysis command was running incorrectly. When I did it right, it looked much more like theirs
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.
