|
|
|
|
|
|
by perl4ever
2167 days ago
|
|
|
Neither your comment nor the summary at the link (I didn't read the actual paper) say anything about whether they adjusted the statistics for plausibly relevant differences in the two populations. It says the results "require further confirmation in prospective, randomized controlled trials", but surely what we all want to know is whether the non-random assignment of patients to the with/without groups was compensated for at all? |
|
|