The discussion centers around the Cass Report, a review of gender medicine in the UK, particularly focusing on the treatment of children regarding gender identity. Participants explore the report's methodology, the criticisms it has received, and the implications of its findings on medical practices related to gender treatment.
Participants express a range of views on the Cass Report's methodology and its implications, with no consensus reached regarding the validity of the criticisms or the appropriateness of excluding low-quality studies from systematic reviews.
Limitations include unresolved questions about the definitions of "low quality" and "high quality" studies, the impact of study exclusion on evidence synthesis, and the potential biases influencing participants' perspectives.
BMJ paper commenting on the Integrity Project paper linked above (McNamara et al) and another (Noone et al):dig6394 said:
I can't tell if this is a joke or not.Ibix said:
https://www.universityofgalway.ie/our-research/people/psychology/chrisnoone/berkeman said:I can't tell if this is a joke or not.
"Who wrote the paper?"
"Noone et al."
The Odysseus and the Cyclops resonance did cross my mind. However, I gather it's probably a variant on the surname O'Nuadhain, which means son of Nuadha (an Irish first name).berkeman said:I can't tell if this is a joke or not.
"Who wrote the paper?"
"Noone et al."
But Peter didn't pronounce his last name "noon"...Vanadium 50 said:
Noone does, I think.Vanadium 50 said: