Dominik Roth
@dominikroth.bsky.social
an anonymous, blunt instrument wielded by a government department
https://linktr.ee/dominikroth
https://linktr.ee/dominikroth
That's not one of the recruits.
November 17, 2025 at 11:53 AM
That's not one of the recruits.
Ja, wird im oben geposteten Erkenntnis auch zitiert. Gibt eigenes Gesetz dazu, mit geringfügig anderen Regeln.
November 13, 2025 at 4:06 PM
Ja, wird im oben geposteten Erkenntnis auch zitiert. Gibt eigenes Gesetz dazu, mit geringfügig anderen Regeln.
und wieder was gelernt: de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_...
Viktor Wolf von Glanvell – Wikipedia
de.wikipedia.org
November 11, 2025 at 10:42 AM
und wieder was gelernt: de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_...
This is the Cochrane DTA review on airway physical examination tests, that has been cited in the guidelines, and which I also presented in Edinburgh. #EMsky www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10....
www.cochranelibrary.com
November 9, 2025 at 11:52 AM
This is the Cochrane DTA review on airway physical examination tests, that has been cited in the guidelines, and which I also presented in Edinburgh. #EMsky www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10....
I still have the quaich and tie I got back then in Edinburgh, and I regularly wear the tie.
November 9, 2025 at 11:52 AM
I still have the quaich and tie I got back then in Edinburgh, and I regularly wear the tie.
Habe gelesen "auf dem Bodensee haben seit dreißig Jahren keine nautischen Konflikte mehr stattgefunden", und es hätte mich nicht gewundert.
November 8, 2025 at 12:02 PM
Habe gelesen "auf dem Bodensee haben seit dreißig Jahren keine nautischen Konflikte mehr stattgefunden", und es hätte mich nicht gewundert.
die verlagerungen bei gyn/gebh bedeuten eine vollständige schließung der abteilungen, oder nur des geburtshilflichen bereichs, oder...?
November 6, 2025 at 11:00 AM
die verlagerungen bei gyn/gebh bedeuten eine vollständige schließung der abteilungen, oder nur des geburtshilflichen bereichs, oder...?
I reject this gross misrepresentation of what I said in the strongest possible terms.
November 2, 2025 at 3:48 PM
I reject this gross misrepresentation of what I said in the strongest possible terms.
I am pretty sure most methodologists on systematic reviews would disagree that it mainly consists of "downloading data and putting it through a template". It explains, however, your view on systematic reviews.
November 2, 2025 at 3:42 PM
I am pretty sure most methodologists on systematic reviews would disagree that it mainly consists of "downloading data and putting it through a template". It explains, however, your view on systematic reviews.
I can't follow this logic. Why is, in your opinion, the same not true for primary research? I'd argue that you have to follow rigorous methodology and be able to prove it.
November 2, 2025 at 3:11 PM
I can't follow this logic. Why is, in your opinion, the same not true for primary research? I'd argue that you have to follow rigorous methodology and be able to prove it.
I do agree however that the cited sentence is incorrect. the target population of the research question almost never is identical with the study population. (except maybe epidemiological research and similar)
November 2, 2025 at 2:17 PM
I do agree however that the cited sentence is incorrect. the target population of the research question almost never is identical with the study population. (except maybe epidemiological research and similar)
my approach is that the inclusion criteria should be wide, and the exclusion criteria should be the exceptions to the former. but maybe there are other views on that? /4.
November 2, 2025 at 2:16 PM
my approach is that the inclusion criteria should be wide, and the exclusion criteria should be the exceptions to the former. but maybe there are other views on that? /4.
in practise I often observe that students struggle with what should go into inclusion and exclusion criteria, and just use the same thing twice (incl: all ppl at least 18yrs old, excl: all ppl <18 yrs old). /3
November 2, 2025 at 2:16 PM
in practise I often observe that students struggle with what should go into inclusion and exclusion criteria, and just use the same thing twice (incl: all ppl at least 18yrs old, excl: all ppl <18 yrs old). /3
Ofc. one could argue that each inclusion criterion is just an exclusion criterion of the opposite "you exclude all ppl except those suffering from chest pain presenting to the ED", but this doesn't add anything useful & could be made in reverse as well (each excl. crit is just an incl crit.) /2
November 2, 2025 at 2:16 PM
Ofc. one could argue that each inclusion criterion is just an exclusion criterion of the opposite "you exclude all ppl except those suffering from chest pain presenting to the ED", but this doesn't add anything useful & could be made in reverse as well (each excl. crit is just an incl crit.) /2
could you pls elaborate on point 1? i don't believe this to be entirely true. If I perform a trial on "people suffering from chest pain, presenting to the ED, excluding those being pregnant or already on drug X", I'd interpret the first two as inclusion, the second two as exclusion criteria. /1
November 2, 2025 at 2:16 PM
could you pls elaborate on point 1? i don't believe this to be entirely true. If I perform a trial on "people suffering from chest pain, presenting to the ED, excluding those being pregnant or already on drug X", I'd interpret the first two as inclusion, the second two as exclusion criteria. /1
Mäci. Deutsche Küche ist nicht essbar. It's a fact.
November 2, 2025 at 2:07 PM
Mäci. Deutsche Küche ist nicht essbar. It's a fact.
...whereas for many primary research papers, it is not. so for peer reviewers, methods are much more reproducible in systematic reviews, than in many primary research papers. #statssky
November 2, 2025 at 2:02 PM
...whereas for many primary research papers, it is not. so for peer reviewers, methods are much more reproducible in systematic reviews, than in many primary research papers. #statssky
systematic reviews w/ & w/o meta-analysis have very little in common with this type of "review" stuff. I can't see why there should be other rules for the latter than for primary research. on the contrary: for a syst. review, in principle, (almost) all the underlying data is publicly available... /1
November 2, 2025 at 2:02 PM
systematic reviews w/ & w/o meta-analysis have very little in common with this type of "review" stuff. I can't see why there should be other rules for the latter than for primary research. on the contrary: for a syst. review, in principle, (almost) all the underlying data is publicly available... /1
Chinese will do a very simple Apollo style/level landing. And that's fine if they don't include a 3 to 5 decade hiatus after that. Might lead to a continuous presence on Moon in the following decade.
November 1, 2025 at 9:22 AM
Chinese will do a very simple Apollo style/level landing. And that's fine if they don't include a 3 to 5 decade hiatus after that. Might lead to a continuous presence on Moon in the following decade.
sagt übrigens eine für das bundesheer vertrauenswürdige quelle ;) www.milak.at/news/detail/...
General Körner, Edler von Siegringen
Ein weiterer Name in der langen Liste der Jahrgangspatrone
www.milak.at
October 27, 2025 at 8:30 AM
sagt übrigens eine für das bundesheer vertrauenswürdige quelle ;) www.milak.at/news/detail/...