Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Matt Cook's avatar

I read papers for a living, as a health researcher. Life is short and reading papers is hard and time consuming. So I use simple heuristics to determine if I’m going to study a paper or not.

Very large studies that promote drugs are a red flag. If an effect is large enough to be clear, it should work in a small study. Large drug company studies are virtually always manipulated if not outright fraudulent.

I also prefer animal studies as they are much clearer as to result.

I pretty much avoid meta studies as their conclusions are whatever their investigators want. But they are useful for their citations.

In my experience, doctors don’t read studies. They don’t have time due to managed care. And they are often incurious and unscientific.

Expand full comment
Adrian Gaty's avatar

“ Not everyone is good at critical appraisal of medical literature. If you aren’t good, it is never too late to work to improve ones skillset before commenting widely.”

Can it be improved? As a fairly recent (within 10 years) med school graduate, I can attest that there was a lot of effort made by the schools to teach critical appraisal of literature… and then Covid happened and that entire generation of young doctors trained in evidence based medicine completely fell on its face when it came to appraising literature!

Sometimes it’s not about reading skills, it’s about resisting groupthink, and I don’t know if that can be taught in, er, groups…

Gaty.substack.com

Expand full comment
18 more comments...

No posts