I’ll add: medical journals *do not study* behavioral changes very often or in enough granularity to be useful, even when common sense and experience says they matter. Ergonomics is a big example. You won’t find published studies saying “bad chairs hurt your back”, but they do.https://twitter.com/bryan_caplan/status/1240638168409370624 …
-
Show this thread
-
It makes sense that posture and movement affect musculoskeletal pain! And every sports coach, physical therapist, dance or yoga instructor I’ve met believes it! But you won’t find much published data about that. This is something where self-experimentation is *necessary*.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likesShow this thread -
Optimizing your physical environment is the kind of thing RCTs are inherently bad at testing. There are infinitely many possible types of chairs; an RCT can only compare maybe two or three.
1 reply 2 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
RCT’s are for *testing* an intervention that you’ve ideally *already designed* to work as well as possible, through a more informal iterative process.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likesShow this thread
So even if an RCT says that some behavioral intervention doesn’t work, when the intervention is some very broad class (“exercise”, “therapy”) that doesn’t actually say that nothing in that class works.
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.