Thanks for sharing these beautiful pictures, Frank.

They’re all good, but this was especially good.

This one was a little too close to home....

3/n

Grateful for our stellar Advisory Board:
• John Andrejack
• Elizabeth (Nicki) Bush
• Bill Byrom
• Robyn Carson
• Cheryl Coon
• Steve Grambow
• Chris Lindsell
• Lola Rahib
• Bryce Reeve

More to come as we develop and share new training resources.

2/n

Leading this initiative with an incredible team from the FDA, Vector Psychometric Group, Symphony Learning, UNC-Chapel Hill, Triangle CERSI, and Duke’s Center for Health Measurement.

Humbling indeed! I had to look it up as well.

Thanks for your interest, Beatriz!

5/5

(4) In a parallel groups design, meaningful within-patient change is not especially relevant for understanding the meaningfulness of a treatment effect. @stephensenn.bsky.social @f2harrell.bsky.social

4/5

(3) Who provides input and what types of anchor variables are used to generate points of reference might differ for interpreting individual- versus population-level estimates of treatment effect.

3/5

(2) Points of reference (a.k.a. “thresholds”) may be different for interpreting individual- and population-level treatment effect estimates.

2/5

(1) Instead of talking about a “between-group difference,” specify the level at which you wish to infer a treatment effect: population or individual. Treatment effects for both levels can be estimated from a parallel groups trial design.