3 ms·
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7068624 https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7068624
by annoyingnoob 1y ago
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7068624 https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7068624
- ptrl600 1y agoAdmittedly it's possible I've been bamboozled
- Etheryte 1y agoI'm not sure what the takeaway is here? If I read that correctly, they only found one study and just reported their results? Is that because there are literally no studies on this worldwide? I find that very hard to believe.
- 2ap 1y agoA systematic review like this can be helpful, in that it identifies where there are gaps in the literature, and prevents hype - if some studies show evidence of effect, and others do not, even if there are only a few published studies then we know somthing new about the totality of the literature on the subject. That said, this particular systematic review has a couple of issues (e.g. I can't find the precise inclusion / exclusion criteria, nor can I find that it has been pre-registered on Prospero or another database). I have written a few systematic reviews where there is very little data already availabe, and we use them to explain to funders why we need to do further research on a given topic.
- zerocrates 1y agoI know there's value to recording the selection process and all that but it's a little funny to have a review that ends up only including one study: at that point just give me a link, not a paper.