Such global confounders have been found, historically, but are fewer and fewer in modern medical science because it's harder to find anything with a large effect that wasn't thought of after these many decades. Most that remain are likely tiny.
-
-
Replying to @EduEngineer @GidMK
Sorry I know I said I wouldn't respond anymore but I can't not bite at that. Are you serious? Is that actually a serious comment?
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @K_Sheldrick @GidMK
My last argument is "OMG, you just wrong, man." May I invite *you* to a recorded discussion of the mathematics?
2 replies 0 retweets 14 likes -
Replying to @EduEngineer @GidMK
Pre-Recorded? Absolutely not. Live and unedited? I'm interested. What topic, what rules?
1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @K_Sheldrick @GidMK
The topic: Do confounders specific to individual studies with no assumed relationship (correlation) have an expected (binomially normalized) effect on a p-value computed from a set of more than 1 study. Recorded live.
2 replies 0 retweets 15 likes -
Replying to @EduEngineer @GidMK
Nope. That's actually not a meaningful topic and makes a number of assumptions that are invalid. Confounders specific to individual studies? Almost all confounders I can think of would be consistent across most studies of a fixed type. 1/
3 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @K_Sheldrick @EduEngineer
I actually can't think of a single confounder that applies to clinical research that wouldn't be consistent across most if not all studies of a fixed type
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @EduEngineer
I can think of some that would apply to observation but not RCTs, but can't think of any that would just randomly reverse between studies.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @K_Sheldrick @EduEngineer
If they did randomly reverse between studies they would pretty much by definition not be confounders tbh
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @K_Sheldrick
You're really saying that all confounders must be non-local in presence, by definition? Wow. We're in crazy land now.
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes
Nope that's just another of your endless straw men 
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.