288
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Actual evidence from actual scientists.

[Image description: A patient holds bottles of medications for hormone replacement therapy as part of her gender-affirming care.]

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

Exactly. Some things just can't be studied as part of a double blind RCT. For example, see: Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: systematic review of randomised controlled trials

The perception that parachutes are a successful intervention is based largely on anecdotal evidence. Observational data have shown that their use is associated with morbidity and mortality, due to both failure of the intervention and iatrogenic complications...

The paper is funny, but the authors are making a serious point. RCTs are great when they're possible, but just because they're not possible doesn't mean we can't gather strong evidence anyway.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Thank you for that paper, that's a great analogy honestly.

this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2023
288 points (100.0% liked)

World News

22023 readers
52 users here now

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


For US News, see the US News community.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS