GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
Single comment threadYou are looking at one branch of the STEP question that gets asked weekly, answered properly — 45 comments in the full submission. View in context.
1.9k
c/trialwatch·submitted 7 months ago by u/first_hundred

the STEP question that gets asked weekly, answered properly

Readoutbranch of 11 comments

the STEP question that gets asked weekly, answered properly. Not a hot take, just something I have not seen said plainly here. Spent an evening with the appendix tables and found the subgroup detail that the entire thread had been speculating about. Relative risk reduction without the baseline rate is…

Read the full submission and all 45 comments →

This branch

11 comments, started 7 months ago
u/ahmed_iyer123 points·7 months ago

Cardiovascular outcome trials are powered for events, not for weight, and are typically run in a different population with different inclusion criteria. Reading a weight number out of one is reading a secondary endpoint.

replysharereportpermalink
u/ines_boateng56 points·7 months ago

Cardiovascular outcome trials are powered for events, not for weight, and are typically run in a different population with different inclusion criteri

Adding the check nobody runs — the registered protocol is public and takes two minutes to compare.

replysharereportpermalink
u/cold_chromatogram3123 points·7 months ago

This. Intention-to-treat versus completer analysis routinely moves the headline by several points.

replysharereportpermalink
u/zaid_roos10 points·7 months ago

Yes — the interval is the finding. A point estimate with a wide interval is a hypothesis in a nice font.

replysharereportpermalink
u/rina_sobczak14 points·7 months ago

What did the confidence interval look like?

replysharereportpermalink
u/first_hundredOP5 points·7 months ago

Read a press release and the publication three months apart. The hedging in the second one was substantial.

replysharereportpermalink
u/ferran_dahlberg39 points·7 months ago

Not convinced. Cross-trial comparison between two programmes with different populations and designs is not a comparison.

replysharereportpermalink
load more comments (4) →

← back to the whole thread

About c/trialwatch

Clinical trial reading group. New readouts, protocol amendments, endpoint definitions, dropout handling, and the difference between a press release and a publication. Absolute risk reduction and number-needed-to-treat are house dialect here.

34kmembers
95submissions
Nov 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

PeptideMeter Analytics

Independent testing plus vendor-level trend data. Community-funded, unaffiliated.

peptidemeter.com
More in c/trialwatch
c/trialwatch rules
  1. Press-release-only posts must be flaired Press Release until a publication exists.
  2. Give the trial name, phase, n, and primary endpoint in the body.
  3. Relative risk reduction alone is not a result. Show the absolute numbers.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Full rules and how they are enforced →
Moderators
u/trialwatch_theou/forest_plot_fionau/hazard_ratio_halu/renal_outcomes_r
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.

Full disclaimer →