NeuroNate said:

Update: approved on the third attempt after a peer-to-peer.

This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.

NeuroNate said:

Update: approved on the third attempt after a peer-to-peer.

True, and it depends on a baseline nobody has stated. Without knowing where someone started, the same number can be an excellent result or a disappointing one.

NeuroNate said:

Update: approved on the third attempt after a peer-to-peer.

Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. I will report back once I have actually tried it.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.

SleepDoc_PDX said:

The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.

Same pattern here, and in the same order. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.