22/n (One thing that gives you an answer more similar to the number they've got is calculating odds based on the %s given in the KM curve rather than the crude figures, but that has its own issues)
-
-
33/n I forgot to mention, the paper was received, revised, and accepted within a month While not unheard of, that's very quick for academic publishing!pic.twitter.com/UgR3WO2BPB
Show this thread -
34/n In summation, the paper: - inadequately rates risk of bias - inappropriately combines estimates... - ...that may have been miscalculated It is hard to know what to make of this, except to say that the paper itself is not very useful in any way
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks for the thread!
@threadreaderapp unroll -
Guten tag, the unroll you asked for:
@GidMK: Ok, I'm inspired by@MicrobiomDigest to do a bit of actual critical appraisal on this new paper by Raoult et al… https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1270198888822009856.html … See you soon.
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.