3 ms·
Well, good luck sustaining the claim that Lee Hooper doesn’t know how to perform a meta analysis and that error got past Cochrane’s notoriously lax peer review
by KempyKolibri 2y ago
Well, good luck sustaining the claim that Lee Hooper doesn’t know how to perform a meta analysis and that error got past Cochrane’s notoriously lax peer review process, and you definitely didn’t just make a mistake reading the table.
I salute your self confidence, I must say I’m somewhat envious of it.
- riku_iki 2y agoI have low opinion about modern academia and quality of "peer review processes".
- KempyKolibri 2y agoIf you misread data in the way you appear to, that doesn’t surprise me. I can’t imagine you think many studies’ conclusions appear to follow from their results. It’s just that you’re blaming the studies, rather than your comprehension.
- riku_iki 2y agoAgain, we are in disagreement who misread the data.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- KempyKolibri 2y agoHonestly, your steadfast insistence that you couldn’t possibly be wrong on this is fascinating to me. I’m happy to admit I made a mistake if I’m misreading the data, so walk me through what you think I’m getting wrong. Please be specific: name the event subtypes you’re looking at, give specific references to the table numbers etc. If I’m wrong about this, I want to know.