Dr.PathRoch said:

Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.

Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. The objection nobody has made: this only works if the measurement is doing what we assume it is doing, and that assumption has not been tested here.

Dr.PathRoch said:

Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.

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. No action needed from anybody.

From the other side of the consultation, briefly. Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third retelling.

NurseKim_ATL said:

Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third…

Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.