@EMcCra2 @drphyto @GeoffSchuler @edgeben Equal numbers are immaterial; EVERY study on the topic is looked at.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @Vbalance03
@EMcCra2
@drphyto@GeoffSchuler@edgeben From the AAP; they looked at 20700 studies (they also looked at animals) http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2014/06/26/peds.2014-1079 …2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @Vbalance03
@EMcCra2
@drphyto@GeoffSchuler@edgeben You would only expect an equal number of studies for and against if there was no effect either way.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
@EMcCra2
@drphyto@GeoffSchuler@edgeben Actually the number of studies in meaningless; it's the strength of the studies that's important.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
@EMcCra2
@drphyto@GeoffSchuler@edgeben So for example 1 high-quality RCT of 1500 people is more useful than a small case-control of 50.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @Vbalance03
@EMcCra2
@drphyto@GeoffSchuler@edgeben Yep. Which is why systematic reviews use independent ratings to measure how well a study was done .1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
@EMcCra2 @drphyto @GeoffSchuler @edgeben That's just an ad hominem attack on the scientific community, which doesn't make you right.
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.