The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
before you do an experiment you have to have an expectation of what you believe the difference is between the groups and you have to determine the number of samples you will need to assess whether or not that difference is there or not so you use something it's called a power table
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
so what this table is saying is you want to pre-suppose you know what the difference is between the treatment groups you you have to say I believe that the difference between the success rate and the treatment between group a and Group B is going to be X percent and the smaller of the two is y percent
you use something it's called a power table and you you would go to the power table so if you if you're doing treatment a versus treatment B and you say look I think treatment a is going to have a 50 response and I think treatment B will have a 65 percent response you literally go to a power table that says 50 response 15 difference that gives you a place on the grid and I want to be 90 sure that I'm right so 90 power