Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yes, I don't understand why this is disappointing. The article also says there are no side effects. Even if there is 10% decrease, isn't it good?


If you read the editorial, the reason is that those were secondary endpoints (not what the trial set out to measure). The literature is filled with exciting secondary endpoint "discoveries" that turn out to be nonsignificant when they become primary endpoints in a study. Also, the data suggest that these secondary endpoints aren't to be trusted because findings don't match other studies.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: