3 ms·
So you’re saying that their current conclusion - that this is significant for heart events, but not in general - is valid statistically? (Honest question)
by p51-remorse 2y ago
So you’re saying that their current conclusion - that this is significant for heart events, but not in general - is valid statistically?
(Honest question)
- topper-123 2y agoNot OP, but to me it sounds line p-hacking aka bad science as well: If you slice a dataset en enough subsamples you will very likely find random correlations. That’s the nature of these kinds of analyses and we should be sceptical of conclusions that are based on suce analyses.