dwazou@lemm.ee to science@lemmy.worldEnglish · edit-27 months agoIs red meat bad for health? Meta-study of 44 studies finds results depend on the sponsor. If the sponsor is impartial, studies find it's bad. Studies sponsored by the meat industry find the oppositepubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.govexternal-linkmessage-square103fedilinkarrow-up1604arrow-down114
arrow-up1590arrow-down1external-linkIs red meat bad for health? Meta-study of 44 studies finds results depend on the sponsor. If the sponsor is impartial, studies find it's bad. Studies sponsored by the meat industry find the oppositepubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.govdwazou@lemm.ee to science@lemmy.worldEnglish · edit-27 months agomessage-square103fedilink
minus-squareRagingRobot@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·7 months agoA study of studies? That’s interesting. I wonder how often that happens? I should do a study about it. A study of studies about studies.
minus-squareparis@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8·7 months agoA review of studies is a meta-analysis. What you’re describing is a meta-meta-analysis, which is also a thing! Here’s one I found from a cursory search..
minus-squaremilicent_bystandr@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·7 months ago Alt text: Life goal #29 is to get enough of them rejected that I can publish a comparative analysis of the rejection letters.
A study of studies? That’s interesting. I wonder how often that happens? I should do a study about it. A study of studies about studies.
A review of studies is a meta-analysis. What you’re describing is a meta-meta-analysis, which is also a thing! Here’s one I found from a cursory search..
Alt text: Life goal #29 is to get enough of them rejected that I can publish a comparative analysis of the rejection letters.