3. The small sample is of little relevance once p-value and CI were established. 4. There is nothing weird with 100% completion when all you're doing is giving a safe oral treatment once every few days and counting ICU admissions. 5...
-
-
As ever, I'm not making any firm claims, I'm pointing out the limitations of the evidence - claiming that this study is firm proof of anything is quite obviously incorrect. Whether or not that should impact clinical decision-making is another debate entirely
-
Also, I cannot stress this point enough. The study was CLEARLY intended as a pilot (which explains many of the deficiencies!)https://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1303561709349527554?s=20 …
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
It's the same: It is indeed hard to reach significance with logistic regression on small samples, but if the effect is strong, it can work. In this case it is, reporting 95% CI of 0.003−0.25. If this study's conclusion is wrong, it's definitely not due to the small sample size.
-
It's not hard to reach statistical significance at all with small samples and logistic regression. What's hard is to see a meaningful result once you add in numerous 'control' variables
- 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.