论文标题
对COVID-19的一些最新工作的批判性评估
A Critical Assessment of Some Recent Work on COVID-19
论文作者
论文摘要
我暂时重新分析了两项关于Covid-19的盛大研究的数据，即Charité的“儿童病毒载荷”和Heinsberg/Gangelt中的Bonn“血清恢复”研究，从预印本中获得的信息。这些研究具有以下共同点： - 他们受到了全世界的关注，可以说有政策影响。 - 他们的发现的推力与各自的主要作者（不同）公共立场相吻合，以适当回应Covid-19。 - 暂时，我对甘泰尔特研究的阅读将其推力中和，而我对Charité研究的阅读却将其逆转。 该练习可能有助于将这些研究置于文献中。由于所有适用于n = 2 Quickfire分析的警告基于预印本，也想知道它是否说明了“研究人员自由度”的无意影响。
I tentatively re-analyze data from two well-publicized studies on COVID-19, namely the Charité "viral load in children" and the Bonn "seroprevalence in Heinsberg/Gangelt" study, from information available in the preprints. The studies have the following in common: - They received worldwide attention and arguably had policy impact. - The thrusts of their findings align with the respective lead authors' (different) public stances on appropriate response to COVID-19. - Tentatively, my reading of the Gangelt study neutralizes its thrust, and my reading of the Charité study reverses it. The exercise may aid in placing these studies in the literature. With all caveats that apply to n=2 quickfire analyses based off preprints, one also wonders whether it illustrates inadvertent effects of "researcher degrees of freedom."
