The brouhaha over the Stanford/Ioannidis infection rate study is kinda inside baseball, but if you're following you should also follow @hildabast, whose critique is excellent. http://hildabastian.net/index.php/91
-
-
-
Replying to @hildabast @TamarHaspel
If you're interested, we will be updating our preprint in the next few days (incl the Spanish study, also CZ and Slovenian data and some other seroprevalence samples)
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @TamarHaspel
Thanks - yes, I'm interested. As it happens, I wrote a critical review of that preprint this morning & will be posting it later - I'll note that you're doing this. I just looked through what I wrote: most of what I've criticized could be fixed easily in an update.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @hildabast @TamarHaspel
Brilliant! Would be glad to fix any issues, more than happy to update
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Unfortunately, most of the criticism I've had so far has been "you're still doing your PhD therefore this study is worthless" which is, unfortunately, not particularly helpful and somewhat obviates the point of putting the study on a preprint server in the first place
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @TamarHaspel
That's gross & yes, totally unhelpful - but also off-target. I think the problems come from a mistake that Ioannidis made too: not having a co-author who's an information specialist.
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes
Entirely fair. There were certainly some issues that we've already fixed, but I'm sure the paper can be improved quite a bit!
Would be great if you could let me know when the review is up? I was planning on doing some work on the paper tomorrow anyway 
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.