Recently it was announced that some organization (It thought it was the SIAI but i can’t find it in their blog) would work to form a panel in order to examine and disambiguate the state of knowledge about a number of different areas, the first being diet, nutrition and exercise. It seems imperative that they take this into consideration. What was this organization, and do we have any way of knowing whether they will or not?
My own opinion of that proposal (I’m not sure whether I said this elsewhere) is that the Group is already being done, and better, by things like the Cochrane Collaboration. There is no comparative advantage there.
That was my thought as well, although if this group were formed I’d be extremely interested in how they worked and what their findings were. I’d imagine Bayesian methods would be the norm, which might give them a leg up.
It would be particularly interesting if they consistently disagreed with mainstream systematic reviews.
Recently it was announced that some organization (It thought it was the SIAI but i can’t find it in their blog) would work to form a panel in order to examine and disambiguate the state of knowledge about a number of different areas, the first being diet, nutrition and exercise. It seems imperative that they take this into consideration. What was this organization, and do we have any way of knowing whether they will or not?
Are you referring to the Persistent Problems Group?
My own opinion of that proposal (I’m not sure whether I said this elsewhere) is that the Group is already being done, and better, by things like the Cochrane Collaboration. There is no comparative advantage there.
That was my thought as well, although if this group were formed I’d be extremely interested in how they worked and what their findings were. I’d imagine Bayesian methods would be the norm, which might give them a leg up.
It would be particularly interesting if they consistently disagreed with mainstream systematic reviews.
Yes, thanks.