|
|
|
|
|
|
by peteradio
1343 days ago
|
|
|
Don't be a jerk, they are suggesting a repurposing of this studies data, which I wouldn't be surprised to learn is already in the works. That's not to say this study was done wrong, it is assessing a different probe. The thing about invitations is that there are more than one way to make one, this is a single snapshot in time of how a population responds to one particular kind of invite. |
|
|
No idea if the study was done correctly or not, I am no expert in medical studies. So to rephrase it, I'd like to see a follow up study as outlined above. Reason being that the corrent one requires a lot of nuance to properly interpret (and I somehow fail to see the point of the results so far, but that ir purely on me), and we all know that technical and scientific nuance is impossible to come by in public discurs. So the risk I see is, that the current study can be seen as showing colonoscopies are pointless and needless, a piint I don't see the study making. And that is not the studies fault, it is us laypeoples and the medias fault on how we cover and consume reporting about medical studies, or scientific studies in general.