(Check out SPRITE here https://peerj.com/preprints/26968v1/ …)
-
-
Moreover, it's very hard to tell if the statistical tests were controlled for multiple comparisons, which is concerning because many of the p-values were between 0.03-0.05pic.twitter.com/kCMktXnc3t
Show this thread -
And, reminder, this was an industry-funded trial, which makes the reporting of the apparently negative findings even more worrying
Show this thread -
Also worth noting that the study didn't really look at multitasking per se, this was based on an extrapolation from the within-group tests that looked at cognitive load!
Show this thread -
TO RECAP: - industry-funded trial - potential issues with study design - strange numbers - results NEGATIVE for primary outcome - didn't look at multitasking - somehow still reported as "water helps multitasking"
Show this thread -
P.S. I forgot to mention that I don't think you can call a trial measuring low water intake to high water intake a trial of water It's a trial of dehydrationpic.twitter.com/g6Hv4gyR0h
Show this thread -
I mean, imagine measuring cognitive ability in people who hadn't eaten in days vs those who'd eaten plenty It's a ridiculous thing to test in the first place!
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.

The number of participants, age brackets, intervention arm protocol, inclusion/exclusion criteria, testing schedule, and outcome measures are different!
That's worrying