The history of EBM shows that many of these interventions fail upon rigorous testing. So if you are a proponent of an unproven intervention, how can you avoid the call to test it rigorously?
-
-
when trials are negative of things we think work (this paper) that must be because they *excluded sickest pts *trivialized the question *insert favorite objection
Show this thread -
I wonder if the
@bmj_latest --- the premiere guardian of EBM -- recognizes that they are undermining their own cause. Oh well, all I can do is make a podcast!@Plenary_SessionShow this thread -
Check it out. Already being used the way i suggestedhttps://twitter.com/ajaykirtane/status/1073278344731475969?s=20 …
Show this thread -
On this episode of
@Plenary_Session I flesh out this discussion even morehttps://soundcloud.com/plenarysession/129-rct-of-parachutes-and-frameworks-for-internal-medicine-with-dr-andre-mansoor …Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
My take away from this is not that these authors are suggesting we should not be testing interventions because we think they already work, but that these pre-existing biases can distort the trial. I agree with you that it’s important people do not interpret it in this way
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.