Well said
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thank you
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
In vivo or in vitro lab? I think the same can be said about the relation of these two!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Very good point.
End of conversation
-
-
-
I think that when I read some Cochrane reviews on med tech, it’s as if engineering isn’t a discipline either and small companies have the kinds of money to throw at RCTs the NIHR used to when getting squeezed
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Totally agree. Much time in academic argument is spent/wasted on defending claims of evidentiary truth and not so much examining the underlying ontological and epistemological assumptions that underpin their conceptions of 'evidence' in the first place
-
Yep. Koch’s postulates etc
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
In conversations abt evidence, I like to have a definition of evidence. If evidence is defined in only 1 way (eg only from casual comparative designs) it’s no use continuing the discussion. Geoff Norman once said: astronomy doesn’t randomise stars to clusters yet it’s a science
-
Been saying something similar for years! Various sources and types of evidence! But those who view evidence in one way only, will strongly disagree with me about “Various sources and types“. I’ve had audience members (talks, conferences) and reviewers tell me this!
- 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.