@WrathMary @fallawanna @preta_6 Cass excluded 101 out of 103 studies on gender-affirming care using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, famous for being extremely subjective. That's not at all appropriate given the contentious and political nature of the review an
@Horry_HB @ThanksYea135498 @Zachariahskylab @whstancil 2 academics is not enough. https://t.co/TpVc8rVCyl Did they contact the authors of the studies? https://t.co/HcRBQ4dAnY Proof you can get biased results You should have many people review the stud
@SianHerfield @NemoSalus @GeorgiaBoyCore1 @whstancil Newcastle-Ottawa is not a standard, it's a methodological tool, and it's a bad one. It is arbitrary and wildly fluctuates the assessment based on, ironically, the researcher's own bias. https://t.co/Ajn
@TaraMuzgrave @dog85569 @jackiebmsp The scale they used for assessing risk of bias has been found to heavily distort results. https://t.co/sEqiox9Gyl