Graham Murray
@gkmurray.bsky.social
Professor of Psychiatry and Neuroscience at Cambridge University and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Trust. Interested in early intervention and personalised medicine.
Reposted by Graham Murray
That’s quite the entrance to bluesky Loic 😅!!
November 12, 2025 at 7:08 PM
That’s quite the entrance to bluesky Loic 😅!!
Reposted by Graham Murray
Gift link!
“To reckon with Watson’s legacy, then, we propose celebrating what he wouldn’t—or couldn’t—recognize: the shared intelligence of the human race, which can produce miracles and wonders, even as each of us, individually, is so terribly fallible.“
“To reckon with Watson’s legacy, then, we propose celebrating what he wouldn’t—or couldn’t—recognize: the shared intelligence of the human race, which can produce miracles and wonders, even as each of us, individually, is so terribly fallible.“
The Paradox of James Watson
The discovery of DNA was evidence of how deeply interconnected humans are, but the late scientist saw only difference.
www.theatlantic.com
November 10, 2025 at 6:56 PM
Gift link!
“To reckon with Watson’s legacy, then, we propose celebrating what he wouldn’t—or couldn’t—recognize: the shared intelligence of the human race, which can produce miracles and wonders, even as each of us, individually, is so terribly fallible.“
“To reckon with Watson’s legacy, then, we propose celebrating what he wouldn’t—or couldn’t—recognize: the shared intelligence of the human race, which can produce miracles and wonders, even as each of us, individually, is so terribly fallible.“
Reposted by Graham Murray
Gift link:
The Paradox of James Watson
The discovery of DNA was evidence of how deeply interconnected humans are, but the late scientist saw only difference.
www.theatlantic.com
November 10, 2025 at 7:12 PM
Gift link:
Reposted by Graham Murray
The second paper (on change scores) was an explanation of why outcome change scores should not be used in observational studies.
Started in 2017, it went through 2+ years of brutal peer review before being published in 2021.
I'm so glad people are reading it!
academic.oup.com/ije/article/...
Started in 2017, it went through 2+ years of brutal peer review before being published in 2021.
I'm so glad people are reading it!
academic.oup.com/ije/article/...
Analyses of ‘change scores’ do not estimate causal effects in observational data
AbstractBackground. In longitudinal data, it is common to create ‘change scores’ by subtracting measurements taken at baseline from those taken at follow-u
academic.oup.com
November 3, 2025 at 4:34 PM
The second paper (on change scores) was an explanation of why outcome change scores should not be used in observational studies.
Started in 2017, it went through 2+ years of brutal peer review before being published in 2021.
I'm so glad people are reading it!
academic.oup.com/ije/article/...
Started in 2017, it went through 2+ years of brutal peer review before being published in 2021.
I'm so glad people are reading it!
academic.oup.com/ije/article/...