what would you tell week-1 you about SELECT
Confession thread, sort of.
I went from 1.7mg to 0.25mg much faster than I should have because the scale had stalled and I got impatient. The stall broke about 3 weeks later, at which point I had no way of knowing whether the dose increase did anything or whether it would have broken anyway.
So now I have reflux I did not need and a data point I cannot interpret. Two lessons in one.
Posting it in the hope that somebody at week 51 reads it before doing the same thing.
best — the order this archive was captured in
STEP, SURMOUNT, SURPASS, SELECT, FLOW, TRIUMPH — read the appendix
Flair changed to match the content. Read the sidebar before posting next time and we are square.
the relative risk reduction in headlines is not the whole story
dropout handling matters, especially on GI-heavy populations
dropout handling matters, especially on GI-heavy populations
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 52 weeks to accept.
STEP 1 readout: 97.9% mean weight loss, absolute numbers matter. Spread around that mean is enormous.
[deleted]
give the trial name, phase, n, and primary endpoint in the body
Three years on this site and the questions have not changed at all. Which is depressing or reassuring depending on the day.
STEP 1 readout: 96.2% mean weight loss, absolute numbers matter. Spread around that mean is enormous.
off-label use data is different from approved-indication data
The evidence standard in c/vendorvetting gets called too strict about once a month, and every time, the thread ends with the complainant agreeing.
The evidence standard in c/vendorvetting gets called too strict about once a month, and every time, the thread ends with the complainant agreeing.
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
absolute risk reduction, not relative risk reduction, that is how you decide
- 1Flair changed to match the content. Read the sidebar before posting next…7 comments in this branch · started by u/trialwatch_theo