a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by mk
mk  ·  1254 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Pubski: October 21, 2020

That is an interesting situation.

I believe I am responsible for a 'corrigendum' to this article: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31542391

Figure 5 looked suspect.

I haven't looked into the corrigendum enough to decide if I buy it.





wasoxygen  ·  1252 days ago  ·  link  ·  

This was that crazy photonegative figure you mentioned in chat!

The correction shows one figure depicting intensity change rather than before-and-after values.

    In the article, we showed data after transforming the Day 0 and Day 14 values within subjects as %. Based on the advice of colleagues and readers, we show data and statistics without that transformation and show the raw data in the following Figures and Appendix. We present analyses of these data conducted and/or reviewed by professional statisticians (see acknowledgements).

The figure now seems to match the change in before and after values. Using the raw change percent (not logâ‚‚) the pattern mostly matches, though I can't distinguish between a 400% increase and a 141% increase in the new Figure 5.