uab9876.bsky.social
10 posts
68 followers
166 following
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
The question to Cochrane should be will they put their money behind the review and pay damages to people who are harmed due to doctors relying on a review that they know is flawed. Same question to the company who publish their reviews.
comment in response to
post
I think it means that if they have proposals with equal scores and limited budget the ME ones will be seen as priority and funded first. Problem is we need to build capacity (i.e. get more researchers involved and hence more research proposals).
comment in response to
post
Do we know if she knows/has views on ME or Long Covid
comment in response to
post
How can anyone trust cochrane to improve methods, They are an organization that seeks to represent the prejudice of their members not science. We have seen that with ME and I suspect will find it looking at other Cochrane output. Cochrane needs to close down.
comment in response to
post
The training courses were mainly done before Andrew Gwynne took over. The issue isn't him.
comment in response to
post
Why the shock they have behaved badly for years?
comment in response to
post
I'm wondering why anyone thought they would behave well and actually do the new review? They clearly wanted to keep up a bad review when they started and have been in no hurry to change. They won't improve until people start questioning their overall editorial integrity and other reviews.
comment in response to
post
Hilda gave cover for cochrane doing the wrong thing for 5 years
comment in response to
post
Lets not forget that retraction watch were conned by the pace authors into supporting them
comment in response to
post
She has given them cover for 5 years doing this whilst they fail to produce a new review. Cochrane should have withdrawn the old review and acted swiftly. How long does a typical review take. We should look at other reviews - do they stand up to examination or is Cochrane just a political org,