A note on sampling biases in the Bangladesh mask trial · HackerPapers discussions

A note on sampling biases in the Bangladesh mask trial — mentioned by timr

Fri, 22 Jul 2022 17:50:10 GMT

Let's be clear on the limits of the study you're quoting -- the total effect size was a tiny, tiny fraction a percent for the surgical mask arm (.09%), and barely reached a reasonable level of statistical significance (p=0.043). There was no statistically significant effect size for cloth masks. No matter how you look at this study -- if you actually read it [1], and don't just read press releases -- it was not a strong result. Moreover, after the raw data for the study was released, there were a number of legitimate critiques that call into question the primary result. For example, this one…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

A note on sampling biases in the Bangladesh mask trial — mentioned by overrun11

Fri, 22 Jul 2022 17:40:07 GMT

I've seen this: https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.01296 but I'm not qualified to really interpret it

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

A note on sampling biases in the Bangladesh mask trial — mentioned by defaultprimate

Tue, 14 Dec 2021 19:12:54 GMT

My mistake, the link in the article you first posted still shows it as a working paper and I couldn't find it with the original title when searching. Interestingly the DOI does not show up https://dx.doi.org/ Here's some further criticisms: https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-1073440/latest.pdf https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.01296 https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s...

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

A note on sampling biases in the Bangladesh mask trial — HN submission

Fri, 03 Dec 2021 09:21:14 GMT

A note on sampling biases in the Bangladesh mask trial

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.