Thanks to @hildabast, who gave such detailed and helpful critique
We haven't adopted everything (I think it's fair to include the CEBM estimate
) but I think we answered most of the questions!https://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1265755135226986499 …
I didn't think of it as a blog post, I came across it on my Twitter search described in the methods. Not unfair to classify it that way, I'll have to have a think. Technically it's not a meta analysis because the IFR estimate doesn't involve statistical aggregation
-
-
It doesn't matter how you come across something, that's not the problem: if it doesn't fit your inclusion criteria, then it has to be excluded. (Or you revise your inclusion criteria & re-do all the methods needed to accommodate & start searching all over again.)
-
Definitely, but the main issue was about how to classify it. I'm not sure it's fair to call the estimate a blog post, it's an expert review published on a university website - in this case, my initial thinking was that it is grey literature
- Show replies
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.