Perspective | Date asserted | The specific claim | Source | Claimants | Claimants' Organizations | Reporters | Publisher | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Con
|
8/2/21
|
Though this sounds intuitively true, it is entirely without an understanding of the assessment and critical appraisal of meta-analysis, and philosophical underpinnings of role of its role within the hierarchy of evidence.
|
[none] | [none] | [link] | |||
Con
|
7/16/21
|
This us almost exactly wrong. Meta-analyses are like computer programs: Garbage in, garbage out. You can't turn a bunch of turds into gold through meta-analysis
|
[none] | [none] | [none] | [link] | ||
Con
|
8/4/21
|
I think I saw Bret Weinstein today even saying, um... you know, meta-analysis can address any issues with low quality trials. It doesn't work that way. It's "garbage in, garbage out." You can't take really poor quality data, um, from a poor quality study and add that all together and make good quality data.
|
[none] | [link] | ||||
Pro
|
7/15/21
|
large RCTs amplify systematic error in addition to signal, whereas meta-analysis amplifies signal, and corrects for error
|
[none] | [none] | [none] | [link] |