MPhil at UOM get a score averaged from 2 reviewers and don't need to resubmit to address comments. A reviewer can adjust their mark after seeing the other reviewer's mark. 70% is needed to pass. I wonder if this is to assist in assessing eligibility for PhD.

Add this to your list of examples. I wonder if it is hard for journals to consider retraction when they have charged publication fees. doi.org/10.1167/tvst...

Thanks for sharing. I've just nominated the paper for our November journal club. I've had two requests for this type of analysis in October alone.

I have a cheap version, but my favourite thing is they don't fall off when jogging. My colleague uses his shokz while swimming!

It is difficult to find prospective comparative studies on many surgical interventions. I am working on a similar systematic review right now. Besides the issues relating to how problematic single-armed pre-post studies are, does anyone have any good references on when not to pool estimates?

I went to visit his plaque in St Peter's when I was in Adelaide for a conference. He must have left tourist attractions all around the world.

It hurt to have to pronounce the second w in Warwick when I lived there.

See you there 😀

Review received this morning. Is this a weird sort of punishment for joking about Reviewer 2 last week?

I am an easy marker for oral presentations because i am always amazed that people can say the right words in the right order. I learn from reading so there's a chance i will mention "poison" distributions if you hand me count data.

They can, as long as they use terms like multivariate, Likert, Rasch, and utilise correctly.

I didn't know there was a difference between used and utilised. I just looked it up and now I'm definitely going to bring it up next time I am Reviewer 2.