We have 11 positions for PhD programs @sharectd on sharing and analysis data. Interested and have a MSc in epi, stats, data science, or related? Apply this month. https://t.co/3bdp0O5SnZ
@nwerre @sharectd Yes we accept internationals. In fact, the eu mobility rule requires that applicants move to the country. The masters needs to be finished by September, but preferably earlier
This includes one PhD project on Methodology for cross-design synthesis with me & @CarlMoons, at @UMCUtrecht and collab with @TPA_Debray@Stanford & https://t.co/jd7fdcWRki
🚨Course announcement🚨
Cochrane Netherlands is once again organizing an online course on how to perform Diagnostic Test Accuracy (DTA) reviews on 29 Nov to 1 Dec 2023.
Learn from experts such as @leeflang_m and @hans_reitsma!
Info and registration at: https://t.co/gg46TIsEAX
🔥Course announcement🔥
Cochrane Netherlands is organizing an online course on how to perform Diagnostic Test Accuracy (DTA) reviews on 7, 8 and 9th Dec 2022.
Learn from experts such as @leeflang_m and @hans_reitsma!
More info and registration at:
https://t.co/AN0s5uZBd5
⚠️Just published:
UPDATE to the living review of prognostic models for covid-19
*over 600 model appraised
*low risk of bias models for several applications
*calibration heterogenous across settings, even for low rob models
*common pitfalls discussed
https://t.co/XME4UHIWdu
NEW PAPER
Large external validation of covid-19 prediction models for mortality @bmj_latest
TL;DR: performance highly heterogenous -- often pretty bad --, but some positive exceptions too that require some recalibration
https://t.co/iYThZtXpFj
@VMTdeJong proposes new methods for developing generalizable prediction models from pooled studies and large clustered data sets . Corresponding software available from CRAN - https://t.co/rXTMPq7qhz https://t.co/NxeRVPGstN
UPDATE of our review of covid 19 models for diagnosis and prognosis published in @bmj_latest https://t.co/4XQOvEuZwY
https://t.co/XME4UHIWdu
A few additional models (Qcovid) are not in this version but on our website https://t.co/Dxa4yj2BEq
@denisevanhout Haha yes 3 groups, except 155 + 81 patients (1/3 of the treatment patients) received a different treatment than they were assigned. There's nothing prospective about that
Finally, they conclude that the positive effect was only observed for HCQ and not CQ, so that ‘these drugs cannot be regarded as interchangeable’ without ever testing for a difference between the outcomes in HCQ vs CQ
6/6
So in both groups HALF of the patients received treatment, and could then still be removed from the analysis if they died or were moved to the ICU that first day, before the study inclusion started!
5/6