I'm confused here, because clearly the researchers knew it was an issue otherwise why investigate?
-
-
Replying to @GidMK @JacobGudiol
Let me put it this way - this was clearly something that the authors knew about, investigated, and considered to be an issue that potentially derailed the narrative. And yet, not addressed at all in the paper, except lumped in with other numbers. That is a bad look
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @JacobGudiol
It is potentially entirely a fluke. It is also possible that excess mortality in this age group was influenced by limited hospital capacity, or that under-reporting of COVID in children was a problem. There is some uncertainty there
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GidMK @JacobGudiol
It's also worrying that what the email itself describes is still basically p-hacking - only reporting the analyses that agree with your argument is literally the definition of p-hacking
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
Both the analysis agrees with the argument. We know that now. There is no real excess death among school kids in Sweden It is just that the other analysis required a lot more explaining in order for it not to be used in a misleading way, as it is now by science magazine etc
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @JacobGudiol
Not really - here's a sentence "There was a modest increase in excess mortality in children 6-17 during this period (avg. 31 to 51) however this was not considered to be related to COVID-19 as none of these deaths were due to the disease
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GidMK
Sure, I'm not saying that he couldn't have included it. But there is a very tight character limit in letters and you know as well as me that a lot of people would have jumped on that number even if told that they weren't related to covid-19
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JacobGudiol
Like I said, I don't see how the character limit makes any difference. Everyone wants a paper in NEJM but there are plenty of other journals!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
I think that the "everyone wants a paper in NEJM" part could explain it
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @JacobGudiol
Lol sure, and my guess is that NEJM might not have published the letter if they'd known about the excess deaths, but that's also kind of the point!
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
To be honest, I think there's a whole other story in how a 1,000-word research letter with the most surface level analysis imaginable came to decide policy in Sweden...
-
-
Replying to @GidMK
Yeah, that letter has had no discernable impact on the policies in Sweden. Schools have actually been closed more after it got published The numbers presented are mostly publicly available data that anyone can request from Socialstyrelsen and SCB
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @JacobGudiol
Oh interesting. I had heard different from some Swedish followers
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like - 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.