Following on from TrialNerd_Beth — and this may be the naive question:

What would you measure differently if you were starting again?

jason_paloalto said:

For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.

Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.

jason_paloalto said:

For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.

Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.

Happy to go further on any of that.

jason_paloalto said:

For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.

Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.