RunnerRach said:The part it does not cover is what to do when the honest answer is "not enough data", which is more often than anyone likes.
Second this.
RunnerRach said:The part it does not cover is what to do when the honest answer is "not enough data", which is more often than anyone likes.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number. A figure without its method cannot be checked, and an unchecked figure is how this community accumulates folklore.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsFollowing on from RunnerRach — and this may be the naive question:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
BiostatsBrad said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
I do not accept the framing. The question has been narrowed to the version that has a tidy answer, and the part that was dropped is the part the OP actually asked about.