Novo Nordisk CagriSema Phase 3 results — need advice

mike_mod said:

Update — my curve sits below the published mean and the explanation is that the trial arm had support I do not have.

Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.

mike_mod said:

Update — my curve sits below the published mean and the explanation is that the trial arm had support I do not have.

Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.

If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.

mike_mod said:

Update — my curve sits below the published mean and the explanation is that the trial arm had support I do not have.

Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion. I will report back once I have actually tried it.

Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.

Dr.SurgeonPGH said:

Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the…

This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. Posting only so the count is not one.