So many mistakes here in both concept and execution. That conversation with the Psychiatrist is bizarre, and must have been embellished for a good story. I thin

So many mistakes here in both concept and execution. That conversation with the Psychiatrist is bizarre, and must have been embellished for a good story. I think what 'Susan' is actually trying to say is that the incremental benefit of using this 'auto meta-analysed' data over the actual studies is very small. The author tries to cast this as 'Doctors not wanting to improve healthcare', which is just a rationalisation for the product which is not useful. Case in point, the spreadsheet cited at the start of the article largely links to a systematic review that is already published, ie the author is copying data someone else has already aggregated and then re-analysing it in basically the same way with a few more studies. And then trying to charge people to access it. This seems manifestly inferior to the existing system if you ask me. Cochrane would be turning in his grave. There just isn't a product you can sell here.