am I the only one who found SURMOUNT harder than the injections
Right, the SURMOUNT question again, but with numbers this time.
I have 13 data points over 18 weeks. The pattern is consistent enough that I do not think it is chance, and boring enough that nobody is going to screenshot it, which is usually a good sign.
The thing I would flag for anyone new: the effect I am describing showed up at week 34, not week 83. People give up long before the interesting part.
Interested in whether this matches other people's logs or whether I am an outlier.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Inter-lab variance on this kind of assay is routinely 1–2 points. Different column, different gradient, different integration.
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
event rates are more informative than hazard ratios alone
the 15 week readout is different from the 14 week readout
This is correct. Discontinuation arms show the regain reality.
Phase 2 or phase 3?
give the trial name, phase, n, and primary endpoint in the body
Water content matters more than people think. If a vial is carrying residual moisture, your "10mg" is not 10mg of peptide.
- 1event rates are more informative than hazard ratios alone7 comments in this branch · started by u/hsa_math