This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1 · go to the accepted answer.
Limitations of datasets: all community-collected data has limitations. The population is self-selected (people in this community are not representative of all people using these compounds). Reporting bias is real (remarkable outcomes get reported; mundane outcomes do not).
The short version is the first sentence; the rest is why.
On community side-effect dataset the community has more anecdote than the confidence in this thread implies, and I include my own contribution in that.
Community side-effect dataset: I have looked for the primary source twice and failed twice. Either it does not exist or it is somewhere I do not know to look, and I would like to know which.
Posting my community side-effect dataset numbers with the method attached so they can be discounted properly. Uncontrolled, unblinded, and collected by someone who wanted a particular answer.
Worth separating two things that post #97 runs together.
A codebook describing each field takes twenty minutes and is what makes the file usable by anyone but you. Most shared datasets here do not have one.
I have three months of notes on community side-effect dataset and the honest summary is that the trend is real and the week-to-week numbers are noise. I nearly drew the opposite conclusion from the first fortnight.
Post #101 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
Aggregating first-hand accounts does not produce evidence of the kind a trial produces. It produces a description of who chose to post, which is a real thing and a different thing.
I would want the raw data before agreeing with my own summary of it.
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
About the Datasets category
Community-collected datasets, their collection methods, and their limitations. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded with its author and a…
|
+6 | 11 | 42k | 12mo |
|
Whether an aggregate is worth publishing at all: a disputed topic — does this still hold?
Whether an aggregate is worth publishing at all: a disputed topic — does this still hold? I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. An honest uncertainty about…
|
+14 | 18 | 3.4k | 2mo |
|
Cleaning a self-reported dataset and what you throw away — what changed since
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Cleaning a self-reported dataset and what you throw away — what changed since Everything below is what sits behind that. What changes if the standard account of…
|
2 | 2k | 1h | |
|
Whether an aggregate is worth publishing at all: a disputed topic
On the subject in the title: Whether an aggregate is worth publishing at all: a disputed topic Working notes rather than a conclusion. An honest uncertainty about whether an aggregate rather than a disguised…
|
+20 | 24 | 18k | 13mo |
|
Contributing data without breaching anyone's privacy — what changed since
On the subject in the title: Contributing data without breaching anyone's privacy — what changed since Working notes rather than a conclusion. What changes if the standard account of Contributing data without…
|
2 | 58k | 17mo |
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Impurity thresholds: where the common numbers come from
Impurity thresholds: where the common numbers come from — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. I have spent a fortnight trying to pin impurity thresholds down and I want to set…
|
+11 | 15 | 825 | 2d |
|
Area percent versus weight percent: the confusion that causes most arguments
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Area percent versus weight percent: the confusion that causes most arguments Everything below is what sits behind that. Proposing that area percent versus weight…
|
+10 | 14 | 2.1k | 2mo |
|
Tag proliferation and whether we should prune
On the subject in the title: Tag proliferation and whether we should prune Working notes rather than a conclusion. I have spent a fortnight trying to pin tag proliferation down and I want to set out where I…
|
2 | 11k | 11mo | |
|
[2026 update] Why 99.2% and 97.8% on the same lot can both be correct
Why 99.2% and 97.8% on the same lot can both be correct — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. I would like to understand what this number means before I…
|
+1 | 5 | 719 | 2d |
|
A friction point in the promotion workflow
A friction point in the promotion workflow — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Asking about friction point directly, because I have read four threads on it and each answered…
|
+4 | 8 | 491 | 11mo |