Validating a calculator against hand arithmetic — what changed since posts 121–138

Nothing a calculator produces is medical advice, and a correct calculation on inappropriate inputs is still an inappropriate answer.

This has been discussed before and I could not find the thread, so, again.

Marking my place. If it changes for me I will come back and say so.

Where a calculator and your own arithmetic disagree, the productive move is to find which step differs rather than to decide which is right.

Narrowing post #123, because the general version has more than one answer.

Checking a tool against a worked example you already trust is five minutes well spent, and it is the only validation available to a user.

It is a small point and it changes the answer, which is an awkward combination.

Post #123 put the caveat in the right place and I want to underline it.

A saved calculation is worth more than a remembered one. Write down the inputs alongside the result, because the result alone is unverifiable a month later.

Not disagreeing with anyone above, just adding the bit I keep having to look up.

I keep a log for Validating a calculator against hand specifically because my memory of it turned out to be systematically wrong in one direction. Six weeks of notes cost nothing and settled it.

Dose equivalence calculator: compounds have different potencies. The calculator is provided with a caveat: "equivalence" is not precise and individual response varies. It is a rough starting point, not a dose prescription.

Adding the boring version of Validating a calculator against hand, because the interesting version keeps getting posted and the boring one is usually right.

Check the ordinary explanations, in order, and stop when one of them accounts for what you are seeing. Most of the time the second one does.

No notes. Posting so the count is not one.

Picking up post #127: that is the part I would want checked first.

Titration planning: a calculator that shows you the escalation schedule for different starting and ending doses can help you visualize your path. Actual path might be slower or adjusted for tolerability.

I have kept the units in throughout, for the obvious reason.

Validating a calculator against hand is one of those subjects where the general answer and the answer for a specific case diverge, and the thread will go in circles until someone says which one is being asked for.

For anyone finding this later: the short answer on Validating a calculator against hand is that it depends on one thing, and the rest of the thread is people identifying which thing.

Confirming post #130 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.

A calculator that shows its working is worth ten that give an answer. The whole value is being able to see which step you disagree with.

It reads as pedantry until the day it does not.

Clear enough that I do not think I have a follow-up, which is unusual.