Jun 7, 2026 at 9:16 AM#16
CarlaRPh_TPA said:MASHdoc_SA said: ...regarding the trial evidence...
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth.
6 6RunnerRach, TrialNerd_Beth, HPLC_Greg and 3 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Jun 7, 2026 at 1:18 PM#17
One thing that is still open after pete_manc_UK’s answer:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
Last edited: Jun 7, 2026 at 3:18 PM
5 5Dr.MetabolicMD, RetaRick_CA, JenPlateau and 2 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Jun 7, 2026 at 5:20 PM#18
Dr.PulmRoch said:Bayesian meta-analysis perspective on the trial evidence: traditional frequentist meta-analyses report point estimates and confidence intervals.
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
4 4BrianDallas92, labquiet_amy, emily_PDX and 1 other
Reply Quote Save Share Report
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsJun 7, 2026 at 9:22 PM#19
Dr.PulmRoch said:Bayesian meta-analysis perspective on the trial evidence: traditional frequentist meta-analyses report point estimates and confidence intervals.
Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
3 3stefan_berlin, Dr.EM_Chicago, pete_RVA
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Jun 8, 2026 at 1:24 AM#20
Moderator note: a post naming a supplier has been edited. Discuss suppliers in the review sections, not here. Report rather than reply if it drifts again.
31 6PeptideSynthNJ, Dr.KarenChen, Dr.NateNeph and 28 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report