2 ms·
When the numbers were small to begin with, a doubled risk ratio could just be the result of statistical noise. You are right in that the mechanisms may not be
by yen223 2y ago
When the numbers were small to begin with, a doubled risk ratio could just be the result of statistical noise.
You are right in that the mechanisms may not be well-understood. This does warrant further study, as the paper concludes.
- whimsicalism 2y agothe studies obviously adjusted for variance when considering if their conclusions are significant, you're beating up a strawman