CarlaRPh_TPA said:MASHdoc_SA said: ...regarding the trial evidence...
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth.
One thing that is still open after pete_manc_UK’s answer:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
Dr.PulmRoch said:Bayesian meta-analysis perspective on the trial evidence: traditional frequentist meta-analyses report point estimates and confidence intervals.
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsDr.PulmRoch said:Bayesian meta-analysis perspective on the trial evidence: traditional frequentist meta-analyses report point estimates and confidence intervals.
Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
Moderator note: a post naming a supplier has been edited. Discuss suppliers in the review sections, not here. Report rather than reply if it drifts again.