Twitter

Archives

Comics* (along with their corresponding raw PSD files) are also available on the CookieScience comics GoogleDrive Google Drive logo. An attempt at categorizing them from an Evidence Based Practice (EBP) perspective can be found on the Open Science Framework here (Mapping of comics).

*along with a few extras (for instance the 2018 Cochrane Colloquium conference illustration and unpublished comics)

0-50


1 - Introduction to The Science of Cookies (1/2)
2 - Introduction to The Science of Cookies (2/2)
3 - Degrees of freedom and data manipulation
4 - The fear of chemicals
5 - Negative findings of a systematic review [Untranslated & retracted]
6 - Super claim corrector
7 - What if researchers streamed their work on Twitch?
8 - Preliminary studies [Untranslated & retracted]
9 - How much is spent on research findings dissemination?
10 - Ignore the litterature I don't want you to read
11 - Unrelated graphics [Untranslated & retracted]
12 - Science isn't only about the results
13 - Science and the medias
14 - Successive approximations until we get closer to the Truth
15 - The research context matters
16 - Poorly reported systematic reviews [Untranslated & retracted]
17 - Too much research to read it all
18 - When statistical tools are too easy to (mis)use
19 - You can find research supporting any claim
20 - Availability heuristic
21 - Facebook echo chambers
22 - Meta-analysis (concept)
23 - Case study design (concept)
24 - Not all research happens in a lab
25 - Peer-review (concept)
26 - Journal subscriptions
27 - Students wanted to contribute to the research project
28 - The power of comments
29 - Don't trust appearances
30 - Publishing bachelor theses as research
31 - Study limitations
32 - Studies stopped early for benefit [Untranslated & retracted]
33 - The Alltrials project
34 - Poorly peer-reviewed
35 - The language of science
36 - Heterogeneity of treatment responses
37 - Operational definitions
38 - Blinding therapists
39 - Journal impact factors
Médecine fondée sur les preuves (EBM)
41 - Decision aid tools
42 - Minority views and false balance
43 - Pragmatic versus explanatory trials
44 - Who reads most research?
45 - Framing information
46 - Being a researcher involves risks
47 - How to read a scientific citation
48 - A recent study with alarming results [Untranslated & retracted]
49 - Relative and absolute risks [Untranslated & retracted]
50 - Self-reports

51-100


51 - CONSORT reporting recommendations
52 - A sample of something
53 - Scientific graffitis
54 - Holidays are meant for drawing
55 - Emotional arguments
56 - Forgotten diseases [Untranslated & retracted]
Créer une question de recherche (PICO)
Où chercher un cookie
Obtenir un cookie
Obtenir un cookie (2)
61 - Iconography and symbols
62 - Medical comics [Untranslated & retracted]
63 - Online surveys meant for teachers [Untranslated & retracted]
64 - The best answer is I don't know [Untranslated & retracted]
65 - Consensus among whom?
66 - Taped problems [Untranslated & retracted]
Anatomie d'un cookie
Sensibilité et spécificité
69 - Searching for health evidence [Untranslated & retracted]
70 - Science and politics
71 - This webcomic does not exist
72 - Conflicts of interests
73 - Years wasted searching things we knew already
74 - You've got to decide between drawing and hobbies
75 - But what is natural?
76 - She did not follow the protocol [Untranslated & retracted]
77 - Pokemon Go and exercise [Untranslated & retracted]
78 - Celebrities had much more impact
79 - Stories used to teach scientific concepts and medical terms
80 - Test yourself to remember
81 - Citation counts means anything
82 - Unregulated medical claims
83 - Wikipedia as a source of knowledge [Untranslated & retracted]
84 - Can't tell who is a researcher
85 - Research is not meant for this question
86 - EBM T-shirts
87 - Inter-rater reliability and assessments
88 - No time meant to communicate the results [Untranslated & retracted]
89 - NASA research now available to all
90 - Unwanted balance
91 - Retractionwatch
92 - Where does copyright end?
93 - Calorie in calorie out, sport to lose weight
94 - Correcting the literature championship
95 - Olympic athletes try everything
96 - Publish or perish
97 - Scientists never change their minds
98 - Hard to find trustworthy source
99 - Already acted on it [Untranslated & retracted]
100 - Unstoppable curiosity

101-150


101 - Make it look equivalent
102 - Our profession should be terminated
103 - Replication studies are all over the place
Quelques sources non scientifiques du savoir
105 - Wonder drug
106 - Celebrate science on this day
Percevoir l'efficacité de quelque chose
108 - Unintended consequences and complex systems
109 - Misciting primary sources
110 - Assessment tools applied to the wrong population
111 - Skepticism does not sell as much as hype
Types de questions de recherche en santé
113 - Levels of analysis and transferability of findings
114 - Difficult medical decision
115 - You can do research from anywhere in the world
116 - Les styles d'apprentissage [Translation=comic 117]
117 - Learning styles [EN]
118 - Too many lobbies
119 - Incentivized to publish fantasy-science
120 - Teach where you can
121 - Value-based research, what matters to you?
122 - Trustworthy science welcome
123 - Can we stop searching now?
124 - Trying comes with risks
125 - Involving patients in research
126 - I know it works
127 - Searching for like-minded people at the wrong place
128 - Explaining often means simplifying the grand puzzle
129 - Guidelines are meant to be used along with judgement
130 - Too early diagnosis [Untranslated & retracted]
131 - First we should replicate the results
132 - The problem was not of medical nature
133 - Checklists aren't always exhaustive
134 - Searching for a research study (exercise) [Untranslated & retracted]
135 - Recall exercise [Untranslated & retracted]
136 - Citing a research study (exercise) [Untranslated & retracted]
137 - Ask for what you want
138 - How do you want to be called? Patient? Sick?
139 - [Cover]
140 - Translation tools [Untranslated & retracted]
141 - Parachutes and huge beneficial effects
142 - Navigation tips
143 - Confounding exercise [Untranslated & retracted]
144 - Old and uncriticized theories taught [Untranslated & retracted]
145 - Predatory journals
146 - No measured side effects [Untranslated & retracted]
147 - Best evidence in your context
148 - Worst than no research
149 - Trusting what the study authors say
150 - Patients have power, what questions could they ask to trialists?

151-200


151 - Collecting research questions at work
152 - Journal clubs
153 - What happens once the study is published?
154 - File drawers and publication bias
155 - Science is "too complicated", they say again and again
156 - Symbols in health research (exercise)
157 - The study authors weren't listening
Outils d'aide à la décision clinique au chevet du patient
159 - This guy is an expert after all
160 - Highly misinformed paradox
161 - A matter of difficult expectations
162 - Priorities according to whom?
163 - We've always taught it this way (tradition)
164 - Trust me! (says the website)
165 - Free access, we aren't there yet
166 - Moving the goalpost and arguing
167 - Social media caused more confusion
168 - Balanced presentation of benefits and harms
169 - Burning out peer reviewers
170 - Language barriers
171 - This is old news, but still novel!
172 - Books can get old very fast
173 - They have more time to do research and more interest
174 - Buy a doctorate
175 - Surrogate endpoints and surrogate outcomes
176 - Independent research institute
177 - Our university's reputation is at stake
178 - Overdiagnosis is in the air, preconditions
179 - A silly decision aid
180 - There is an app for everything
181 - MeSH, medical subject headings
182 - Medical recertification
183 - Retractations
184 - Side effects of The Science of Cookies
185 - Feeling different among them
186 - More research, always more research
187 - How big is this change? How important?
188 - Statistically significant, clinically significant, what's the significance?
189 - Overtesting the healthy
190 - Meta-analyzing creature [Untranslated]
191 - Blacklists and whitelists
192 - Until old practices die out
193 - Trustworthy keywords
194 - Widening diagnostic criterias
195 - Moderate skepticism
196 - Treatment thresholds
197 - Searching at the wrong place
198 - Shorter translations [Untranslated & retracted]
199 - How to build Science?
200 - Too cheap to be effective?

201-250


201 - Feeling active
202 - Books available in the waiting room
203 - Baselince characteristics were slightly different
204 - Improving the research building blocks
205 - Abstract abstracts
206 - Not enough space to report the study details
207 - Deprescribing
208 - Primary and secondary sources of information
209 - Self-citations, cite thyself
210 - Critically appraising science-inspired comic strips
211 - Mixing apples with oranges
212 - Vaccination rates are declining, we need better education
213 - Marketing and seeding trials
214 - Pay first, find out if the study is relevant afterwards
215 - The do nothing option
216 - Doctors aren't immune from standards
217 - International "Remove a diagnosis" day
218 - Teaching what can be measured
219 - Make it simple
220 - Advanced care directives
221 - Study retracted for unknown reasons
222 - Don't tell anyone he's falsifying data!
223 - What you make public can be modified
224 - Side effects reported in registries vs side effects reported in the study report
225 - How specific is this benefit description?
226 - Certainy, risks and uncertainty
227 - Viruses do not distinguish
228 - Data sharing comes with a cost
229 - Paternalism [Untranslated & retracted]
230 - Why use comparison groups?
231 - Consensus criterias and thresholds
232 - Academics biased against women
233 - Misconceptions are due to emerge
234 - The James Lind Alliance
235 - Visual dropdown menu research concept explanations
236 - Burden of proof
237 - Ever smaller "anomalies" get detected by medical tests
238 - Guidelines written by conflicted individuals
239 - Intoxstop internet module
240 - Crowdfunded research
241 - What are the risks if I do poor research?
242 - Selective reporting of study results
243 - Maximum transparency in research
244 - Quantifying health
245 - When confidence intervals are forgotten
246 - Scientific badges to incentivize productive practices
247 - Taught how to remove diagnosis
248 - Dismissing criticisms for questionable reasons
249 - The test outcome changes nothing
250 - Anxiety-related effectiveness

251-300


251 - Scientific jargon
252 - Corrections much less visible than the error itself
253 - Hypoallergenic
254 - Fee news, high quality news, both?
255 - Transparency won't fix everything
256 - Read the small prints
257 - More education was not the answer
Revues systématiques : Qu'est-ce?
259 - Funded given we produce spectacular results
260 - Blind to the study results
261 - This guy is kinda atypical and rather quiet
262 - Wasting resources on ineffective treatments
263 - Making plans for the unlikely
264 - Politicians acting fast
265 - I'm either a geek or a scientists depending how I read
266 - Medicalizing normal
267 - Ideas all day long
268 - Patient representatives given no power
269 - Diagnosed by a smartphone
270 - The scientific community
271 - Not enough care, enough care, overcare
272 - How long should we follow study participants?
273 - This is not the only study on this topic
274 - Means flawed by outliers
275 - Meaningless means
276 - This test does not predict the future
277 - Frugal innovations in medicine
278 - Slow price increases
279 - Protocol adherence
280 - Faking journal impact factors
281 - Standards changed over the years
282 - Subgroup analysis
283 - Absolute and relative risk differences
284 - Spinning the study results in your favour
285 - We needed a consensus
286 - What are the risks if I overdiagnose?
287 - Too much paperwork
288 - Nature makes no sense
289 - Question your practices
290 - Old-fashioned things to do for better health
291 - Comparing risks with other daily risks
292 - How to make Science of Cookies comics
293 - Disconfirmation bias
294 - Expectations made the medicine effective
295 - Eminence based medicine
296 - Was it truth or myth?
297 - "Feel good" health campaign
298 - Unrelated conclusions
299 - Minor typos
300 - Genes offer some protection (to an extent)

301-350


301 - This "revolutionary" thing is soon going to happen
Qualité des preuves
303 - Update guidelines and include the new poorly done study NOW!
304 - Minimally clinically important difference (= does a difference this big matter to stakeholders?)
305 - Too many things I'd like to draw (okay, I did a few)
306 - Genetic risk, what do you do with it?
307 - Choosing Wisely Canada was there
308 - Not really a controversy according to all but one
309 - Social media as a form of continuing education
310 - A "large" beneficial effect
311 - Acknowledging faked data will backfire in my face
312 - A new study shows (stuff)
313 - My experience as a volunteer translator for the Cochrane health organization
314 - Tests results on a continuum
315 - Competition: Who can best explain science?
316 - Calendar of key health research concepts
317 - I'm not sharing what I found!
318 - The patient getting the most attention
319 - Filling the gaps in the story
320 - Publish more? Okay, I'll make them shorter
321 - Pick the biggest number and put it in the news
322 - "Difficult patients" (=me)
323 - This is a normal part of life
324 - FIRST! Skipped steps though
325 - Getting paranoid about criticisms
326 - Outcome switching
Réactions différentes à la même critique
328 - What is there evidence on in a hospital?
329 - Citation cartels
330 - Come with a notepad and a friend
331 - Successful research
332 - Top secret diagnosis
333 - All predictions were correct
334 - Miracles vs research
335 - Scientists looking for truth? How old fashioned!
336 - What would an independent expert say?
337 - Everyone does it, it must be safe, right?
338 - Transparency matters no matter what
339 - A good study and/or a famous journal?
340 - Skeptical about science comics
341 - IN MICE!
342 - Country allegiance?
343 - Blank study protocols
344 - Was the feedback you got accurate?
345 - Nobody believes in fake news
346 - Relative % increase
347 - We did that "thing" the others did
348 - Hyped funding
349 - Flawed sampling (selection bias)
350 - Allegiance bias

351-400


351 - Unrealistif demands from the funder
352 - Statistical power (general concept)
353 - Notifications when study gets cited
354 - How do you justify doing this study?
355 - Science is sometimes self-correcting (if someone does the fixing)
356 - Patient preferences taken into account
357 - Composite endpoints
358 - History bias
359 - The abstract did not tell me: is this an increase or a decrease?
360 - Please point out the flaws to us (and get silenced!)
361 - Conflicts of interests among patient representatives
362 - Fake study generator
363 - Silencing scientists
364 - Is this therapist evidence-based?
365 - Had he not pointed out these errors then...
366 - Surely researchers know this stuff... right?
367 - Infinite number of measurement scales
368 - Shotgun research
369 - Long-term effects not known in the short-term
370 - Trust me this study will be published
371 - Systematic reviews: Benefits [Untranslated and Retracted]
372 - A small risk multiplied many times is still a small risk
373 - Titles matter (you read this title right!)
374 - This data is ours
375 - Keeping morale up
376 - What did you measure?
377 - No need to be an expert to read "in rats"
378 - Volunteering researcher
379 - Killing competition through overpricing products
380 - More drugs or fewer drugs?
381 - Your treatment will be a comic book
382 - One of these ingredients gotta have active properties
383 - Systematic reviews: Risks and limitations [Untranslated and Retracted]
384 - Learn by heart what you don't need to
385 - How subjective can a Yes/No questionnaire be?
386 - You could read instead
387 - Unmentioned alternatives
388 - Don't want to retract a study (editor's perspective)
389 - Never say anything, never be wrong
Biais des survivants
391 - Misattribution of memories
392 - Too big to fail professor
393 - What is included in this category?
394 - Using grad students as slaves
395 - Systematic reviews: Quality assessment (modified Amstar) [Untranslated & Retracted]
396 - New drugs mostly don't work on average
397 - Following professionals on Facebook
398 - We didn't do what we just did
399 - Courage l'éléphant pharmacien [Untranslated]
400 - Too many things simply don't work

401-450


401 - Measuring self-reported knowledge
402 - Dungeons and healthcare
403 - Systematic reviews: Assessing quality (brief assessment) [Untranslated & retracted]
404 - Stop hyping my research
405 - Systematic review: Qualitative example CD011787 [Untranslated]
406 - Don't trust the comics!
407 - This drug prevents cancer
408 - Reality is reality, no matter what you believe
409 - Pay to fix others' errors
410 - Costly mistakes within the comics
411 - Thinking all the time
412 - Tiny errors can be found everywhere
413 - They all look the same
414 - Incomplete checklist
415 - More tests, always more tests
416 - Poorly disguised placebo
417 - March for Science
418 - Systematic reviews: Future developments [Untranslated & retracted]
419 - Systematic reviews: How important are the results? [Untranslated & retracted]
420 - Arbitrary p-value threshold
421 - Chasing unicorns
422 - Evidence alert systems and EvidenceAlerts McMaster
423 - What research did stakeholders want to begin with?
424 - Life has a cost
425 - Slightly modified test [Untranslated & retracted]
426 - Share the research with your doctor
427 - Must meet quotas
428 - Systematic reviews: Assessing quality (applicability) [Untranslated & retracted]
429 - Theory vs real-life
430 - Give me your data or else-
431 - Please do our research for us
432 - How did participants understand your questions?
433 - "Large" scientific impact
434 - Tests are for the doctors, not you
435 - Well-selected testimonials
436 - Humorous research
437 - Aware of ALL diseases
438 - You can criticize anything
439 - Think about your practices, reflective practice
440 - Best practice of some time ago
441 - Share your work or get the glory
442 - Thank you for your criticisms
443 - Sunk costs
444 - It's "only" herbs, not drugs
445 - This work cannot be reproduced
446 - You can decide
447 - PubPeer and post-publication peer-review
448 - Fake research
449 - Copyright clearance
450 - What do scientists do most of the time? Not always research...

451-500


451 - Unecessary health tests and doing too much for no good reason
452 - Typical questions from research illustrators
453 - Removing limitations is the way to publication
454 - Sexuality matters for patients
Régularité du contenu de plantes [Untranslated]
456 - Future study impact
457 - Screening should be a choice
458 - Pick a peer-reviewer you like
459 - How did you name this medicine?
460 - Time takes too long
461 - Monetary incentives for each patient enrolled
462 - Trying to be everything
Recherche qualitative : Exemple points de vue de parents vivant en Suisse sur la vaccination [Untranslated]
464 - Did the same mistakes as others
465 - Best practice advice was followed, but when?
466 - Moving the goalpost with impossible requirements
467 - Must try to prove I'm wrong if I want to be right
468 - Wasted time spent searching
469 - Subjective symptom descriptions
470 - Ad hominem
471 - Path of least chance of getting sued
472 - Bury harms in the study supplements
473 - You can't fix by analysis what you broke by design
474 - Unclear health guidelines
475 - Non-inferior treatment (given a margin)
476 - Make the healthy sick again!
477 - The best least worst terrible option
478 - Doing nothing will get me blamed
479 - The perfect screening test (for industry)
480 - Someone should do this research
481 - Children as peer-reviewers
482 - "People suffering from..."
483 - Better a random one than none
484 - Should you correct this anomaly in your illustration?
485 - Clumsy harm definitions
486 - Randomised controlled trial: Routine resite of intravenous catheters
487 - No criticisms means...?
488 - The master said, the master they imitate
489 - Randomised controlled trial: Larval therapy for venous leg ulcers
490 - Research is not required
491 - Tested on the healthy
492 - Illustrators have conflicts too
493 - Is it unethical over here?
494 - Measuring known adverse events
495 - Focus on drawing useful studies
496 - Randomised controlled trials: Amoxicillin for lower respiratory infections
497 - "I trust my experience"
498 - Different standards in animal research
499 - Healthy volunteers
500 - Journalists should know when a study is about mice

501-550


501 - The consequence isn't much of a deterrent
502 - Randomised controlled trial: H1N1 influenza vaccine safety
503 - Studies show it is a bad idea. Stop doing the studies?
504 - Data sharing statements
505 - Anomalous anomaly maybe
506 - Citation counting heuristic
507 - A diagnosis that makes anxious
508 - We never retracted a study
509 - Post-hoc logic and inadequate theories
510 - What does "could" mean for you?
511 - If I could have a superpower...
512 - Let's play LEGO randomized trial
513 - The Science of Cookies is a pilot trial
514 - Based on poorer standards than the evidence you reject
515 - Strategies when searching for a differential diagnosis
516 - Reimbursed as a surrogate for effectiveness
517 - A matter of priorities
518 - Symptom checkers [Untranslated & Retracted]
519 - Searching with Pubmed Clinical Queries
520 - I can't do that without a computer program
521 - The CONSORT statement
522 - Experimental booklet
523 - Streamlining experimental research involving comics
524 - Ask your librarian
525 - Which source is it?
526 - Searching on the Tripdatabase
527 - Sources don't matter anyway!
528 - Is it faster or better that you want?
529 - MORE NEW, NOW, NEED!
530 - Nudging colleagues to use EBP websites
531 - Classes on how to change your mind
532 - You can think of it with a probability
533 - Population level uncontrolled experiments
534 - Experimental devices in your body
535 - Where does this certificate come from?
536 - They forgot how to search the day before they learned
537 - Using a diagnosis for profit
538 - The cause of death is only part of some stories
539 - Getting rid of the knowledge to practice gap
540 - Can you get this information without technology?
541 - Which scale to use to measure this?
542 - Copyright boundaries
543 - Trial registries said different things
544 - Disclose ALL risks to the study participants
545 - Explain your job to a 5 years old
546 - I have experience by proxy
547 - Is this PDF the most up-to-date version?
548 - Looking for magic
549 - Should we ask for consent?
550 - What will you do with this test result?

551-600


551 - Uncertainty was left to grow
552 - Nepotism among funders
553 - Shorter manuscripts, shorter time until publication?
554 - Give us immunity against getting sued
555 - Long-term treatment based on short-term data
556 - A preliminary diagnosis stayed for years
557 - Individual items matter when you assess study quality
558 - Long-term treatment for someone with a short prognosis
559 - Pointing out problems leads you to trouble
560 - A third of it is references anyway
561 - When you complete your studies the secret will be revealed
562 - The diagnostic threshold will change only a little bit
563 - How subjective can a fracture be?
564 - Unreported demographics
565 - Referrals were made thoughtfully
566 - Try checking everyting and you'll see the problem
567 - Publishers asked for my rights
568 - Evidence would make no difference
569 - How will you handle poor participant recruitment?
570 - Nobody wanted our "negative" journals
571 - Too many drawings
572 - Minimum article lenght explained
573 - Who needs to know what for shared decision making?
574 - The mechanism of action is "I don't have any idea"
575 - Highly effective at reducing [a risk]
576 - Predatory journals can be attractive
577 - Borderline gibberish
578 - Certainty of the evidence, what words did they use?
579 - Strategic control of potential study participants
580 - Conclusive results would be terrifying
581 - N-of-1 research and advanced directives [untranslated]
582 - Should we start all over again every single time?
583 - Scarcity can be opportunity
584 - Evidence does not speak for itself
585 - Statistical significance and clinical significance clash
586 - The error was corrected but only partly
587 - Poor study design or poorly used study design?
588 - Great evidence but maybe a bit late
589 - Pre-req for research
590 - Impossible standards
591 - Publish results within a year or else...
592 - Critical appraisal is to use sparingly
593 - We know results already
594 - Learning everything about medicine will take forever
595 - Giving to charities with what specific intentions?
596 - Explaining treatment options wasn't expected
597 - Please do research and good luck doing that
598 - Treatment rationale
599 - Test to test some more
600 - Try assessing their methods

601-650


601 - Too much of a critique
602 - Cherry picking results
603 - Slowing growth surrogate measure
604 - "Studies", "studies", "studies", but what kind of studies?
605 - What part of the confidence interval did you look at?
606 - Results hidden in plain sight
607 - Screening for this disease stopped being useful
608 - We all have unfounded beliefs
609 - All experts can look stupid
610 - The ethics of NOT NOT doing research
611 - Research can be expensive
612 - Time spent learning stuff you won't need
613 - This unfair comparison was intended
614 - Survival isn't everything
615 - Shorten the medical curriculum (here, I've said it!)
616 - What does a doctor look like?
617 - Documentaries made to keep your attention
618 - Pragmatic lesson content
619 - Knowing what doesn't work is only a step towards progress
620 - Accuracy mattered not
621 - Flashcards from The Science of Cookies
622 - Numbers mean something
623 - Looking for research or looking for answers?
624 - Each lesson is part of a trial
625 - "Evidence based" what do you mean?
626 - Feedback excessively delayed
627 - Procrastinating spaced learning
628 - Try correcting a printed piece of paper
629 - Teach what is based on the most reliable evidence
630 - Pressuring for hope
631 - What did this core outcome set become?
632 - Treatment is effective given [conditions adequately followed]
633 - Can't be done until it has been done conundrum
634 - Studies cut into pieces and salami slicing
635 - Draw here
636 - What does it mean when a journal endorses something?
637 - Sue your enemy until he/she/they gives up
638 - Effectiveness is only a part of the decision
639 - Test to learn, test to teach
640 - Some topics get more funds than others
641 - What did this conference abstract become?
642 - Waiting on the ethics committee's decision
643 - Call your study what it actually is
644 - What's in it for me?
645 - Subtle conflicts of interests and good manners
646 - It doesn't work saves money
647 - Readers might benefit from a stop & think
648 - Do you need to read everything?
649 - Made too simple
650 - Surprising study exclusion criterias

651-700


651 - Known unknown variables
652 - Publishing study results could be easier
653 - Only a lifetime left to draw
654 - Evidence based practice does not have to be a one-man activity
655 - What is the purpose of giving you this diagnosis?
656 - A treatment is on the horizon (but you shouldn't expect it)
657 - Keeping track of what I read
658 - Kill what's sacred
659 - It might take a number of books before you find this insight
660 - EBM Bulletin boards within hospitals
661 - Incidental findings and their prognosis
662 - Bad news, you will die
663 - Excellence within the team
664 - Governments depending on industry
665 - How do the comics relate to eachother?
666 - Screening until the end of times
667 - New points of views welcome (or not)
668 - Standards differ between fields of research
669 - Likelihood ratios (LRs), what are they for?
670 - Analyze until you get what you want
671 - Entry tests killed innovators
672 - Fake conferences, true costs
673 - Sustainable changes of practices
674 - On the many ways to analyze data
675 - Make it look rubbish to publish in rubbish journals?
676 - Why did you learn science?
677 - Only so much you can do with limited continuing education
678 - Remove outliers and run the test again
679 - Unequal author contributions
680 - Algorithms are biased
681 - Investing in what you decide to read
682 - "Non-significant" side effects go unreported
683 - Regular practice of EBP is required
684 - Unusual skillsets
685 - Exploratory analysis and forking paths
686 - Jargon strikes again
687 - Making thoughts on research articles public (journal clubs)
688 - I went to a predatory conference, now what?
689 - A culture against errors incentivizes secrecy
690 - Broaden your searches
691 - Rhetorics can trump evidence
692 - Automatically flawed analysis
693 - What matters to ethics committees?
694 - Information specialists, the great knowledge organizers
695 - Librarians coming on rounds
696 - Life is an experiment
697 - I'll stay in this trial by all means
698 - Is curiosity reason enough?
699 - Alerted on new publications
700 - In the event of too much good evidence you should ______

701-750


701 - The cult of continuing education
702 - Excessively specific guidelines
703 - Test results depend on experience with the test
704 - Survival at 5 years
705 - What are French researchers citing when they do?
706 - Train rides as teaching/drawing/learning opportunities
707 - I work alone to work evidence-based
708 - Thank you for doing nothing
709 - Obsolete by default
710 - Researchers will game your metrics
711 - When guideline developers don't want to make people angry
712 - Systematic reviews: Selective versus routine episiotomies for vaginal birth CD000081
713 - Train recall
714 - The cheapeast study design we will select
715 - 50 journals a day is enough
716 - Which sources of information are you using (comics interpretation)
717 - Exclusion criterias were chosen at random
718 - When systematic reviews disagree with eachother
719 - Additional files are available online
720 - Conceptual study reproduction
721 - What would be a perfect study?
722 - Who followed the manual?
723 - I am not an evidence based practitioner
724 - Peer reviewers had expertise, but which kind of expertise?
725 - I will teach you how to prove magic with research
726 - Ask an outsider
727 - Authors made something simple excessively complicated
728 - More studies and improved knowledge are different things
729 - Clinical question answering services
730 - A costly search strategy
731 - Doubt is mandatory
732 - Looking for errors is still looking for errors
733 - "Prove it does not fail" did not sound fundable
734 - Pretest questions
735 - Compare with useless and claim effectiveness
736 - "We followed the CONSORT checklist"
737 - I'll need a couple clones to keep up
738 - Checklist appraisal killed details
739 - Conflicting recommendations
740 - Diagnos-biased
741 - On the day French and English met
742 - Systematic reviews are easy to do they say
743 - Negative results are welcome over here
744 - Ignore all poor research strategy
745 - Highly satisfied patients
746 - Time wasted doing things for no good reasons
747 - What would you do without _______?
748 - Selective drawings to foster curiosity
749 - A well-known author
750 - The Science of Cookies file drawer

751-800


751 - Arbitrary inclusion criterias
752 - The Science of Cookies is not available unless...
753 - Wait there is already a study ongoing
754 - The first step of evidence based medicine (EBM)
755 - Double-checking experts to build confidence
756 - Teaching evidence based medicine (EBM) whenever we can
757 - Give me time for research and I will know about research
758 - 85% of biomedical research might be wasted, what does it mean?
759 - If treatment cost was based on effect alone
760 - Indirect learning
761 - Everything shall be redacted
762 - Unreliable results but reliable data
763 - Rapid research and implementation priority setting for wound care uncertainties
764 - Etablissement des priorités de recherche pour les incertitudes relatives aux soins de plaies [Translation=comic 763]
765 - This alternative treatment is pretty standard
766 - Collaborate with the strongest opponent
767 - Biased continuing education
768 - Significant by the comma
769 - Who will ever notice?
770 - Subjectivity won't disappear
771 - Alternative explanations
772 - Excessively anonymous data
773 - Spread things out or keep things in one place?
774 - Time well spent
775 - Not looking for alternatives anymore
776 - International catalogue of visual explanations
777 - Should you incentivize pointing out errors in the comics?
778 - When a diagnosis died down
779 - Guidelines should tell you useful things
780 - The more expensive the better I am
781 - Online disclosures of conflicts of interests
782 - Checklist used differently depending on prior beliefs
783 - Spurious associations
784 - Do my colleagues know about evidence based medicine?
785 - Use Wikipedia
786 - It took some time to typeset the manuscript
787 - It's not in a scientific journal
788 - A "small" contribution to this research
789 - Every day is full of qualitative data
790 - Country-specific effects or fantasy?
791 - What is missing from this study report?
792 - Who's ready to wait for good evidence on comics?
793 - The ethics of contradictory effects
794 - Hide random things for no good reasons
795 - The Science of Cookies big red button
796 - Everything is statistically significant
797 - This illustration was done with no help
798 - Weekly EBM quizzes
799 - Revues systématiques : Le recours sélectif à l'épisiotomie par rapport au recours systématique pour l'accouchement par voie basse CD000081 [Translation=comic 712]
800 - Not citing for political purposes

801-850


801 - Which steps of your complex intervention are based on strong evidence?
802 - It took some time to correct
803 - It is good we know about unreliable studies
804 - Research regulations are supposed to work
805 - I prefer to know I don't know
806 - Views and website visitors are surrogate measures of impact
807 - Clinical epidemiology comics, sure!
808 - A bachelor thesis we don't want to see
809 - Simulate developing a guideline
810 - Citing studies can be a form of art
811 - Too many steps to trust the mechanism
812 - My job is taking care of myself
813 - A key study element was missing, maybe the most important one
814 - Maybe this comic meant something else
815 - My life is typical
816 - Good evidence will appear, eventually
817 - An army of potential researchers wasting their time
818 - Core Health Outcomes In Childhood Epilepsy (CHOICE): Core Outcomes Set selection study protocol [Translation available online]
819 - Methods are reported in a previous publication
820 - Why are you teaching people to find poor evidence?
821 - Failproof references
822 - We only have 10 hours to write this guideline
823 - Who has more time for research?
824 - Few words difference, large difference (search strategy)
825 - Enthusiastically not participating in this research
826 - Conflicts o-
827 - All study risks were considered
828 - How much of an exhaustive search was this?
829 - This reviewer has expertise
830 - Asking for the unknown
831 - Psychometric tests involve subjectivity [Untranslated]
832 - Score range unknown
833 - They learned the theory very well
834 - Guidelines can't involve everyone
835 - "I won't publish in a scientific journal" he said
836 - He published something new on his wall
837 - Children are your only chance
838 - What research is taking place in my hospital?
839 - Teach someone how to do a randomized trial and...
840 - Practices are heterogeneous
841 - Mom asked for this research
842 - Certificate or skills?
843 - The day TV series show up-to-date practices
844 - It's only a small study detail
845 - Non-standardized patient information leaflets
846 - How reliable were their diagnostic assessments?
847 - Better not to tell them
848 - Make it more complicated to hide things
849 - Clinical epidemiology illustrator
850 - Aggregated n-of-1 trials of central nervous system stimulants versus placebo for paediatric traumatic brain injury

851-900


851 - You won't find the answer if you don't ask again
852 - Results so good they appear unlikely
853 - Computer tools to make research easy
854 - The editorial board has the power
855 - Measurement scales disagreement
856 - Everyone knows what "treatment as usual" means
857 - Academia clinical practice false dichotomy
858 - How was this treatment called confusion
859 - N-of-1 trials interest group
860 - Waiting for perfect evidence
861 - First authorship wars
862 - Contact the study authors
863 - Les stimulants du système nerveux central par rapport à des placebos pour les traumatismes crâniens chez les enfants : essais individuels (n-of-1) combinés [Translation=comic 850]
864 - Recommendations, not rules
865 - Research is too slow
866 - EBM Cursus vitae unreadable to most
867 - Counting publications, count, count, count
868 - We should measure just one more thing...
869 - Evidence champions
870 - Corrupt the comics through feedbacks
871 - Industry gifts, be wary!
872 - Best not to
873 - Pick an evidence based profession... if you can?
874 - Colleagues' claims are based on...
875 - John PA Ioannidis Research waste Taboo card
876 - Collaboration is the future (past)
877 - Reading research killed their morale
878 - Cut training into pieces and find the useful ones
879 - Multicenter trial regulations
880 - Too few participants to do anything
881 - Open to criticisms when it benefits us
882 - Research skills matter to those who understand them
883 - Pubmed AND operator
884 - Stop explaining your work, researchers!
885 - How much imperfect is okay?
886 - Errare author est
887 - Lateral recovery position [Untranslated & Retracted]
888 - Kill my enthusiasm if it gets excessive
889 - How many research questions per day per patient?
890 - An excessively well-known study
891 - A highly selective journal it would appear
892 - The way of cheaters
893 - The future will be different, but how different?
894 - The last explorers
895 - Logic is overrated
896 - Certificates can mean many things
897 - Who likes to be the downer?
898 - They couldn't have known
899 - This study will end up published no matter what
900 - Research is "only research"

901-950


901 - Website aesthetics stopped being a criteria for poor scientific journals
902 - No good alternatives
903 - It works this way, currently at least (mechanisms of action)
904 - Give me a reason to have study registries
905 - How costly will it become to stop you from doing this in X years?
906 - The first study on the subject is not the end of it all
907 - How to foster a research culture in your ward
908 - Tell students about bad research or don't tell students?
909 - I know lots but maybe I know little
910 - Some are talented at killing research efforts
911 - Evidence is available to everyone, you only need wifi
912 - "Together we are stronger" is easy to say
913 - (mis)targeted health screening
914 - Evidence Based Practice shortcut
915 - Stopping poor research illustrators?
916 - Please teach me clinical epidemiology
917 - The best statistical test in this situation is...
918 - It is not only a checklist exercise, think!
919 - A major problem somewhere somewhere
920 - There is always something to improve mindset
921 - First you need peers to peer-review
922 - Fragmented research ideas
923 - The Science of Cookies must NOT stay current
924 - Barrier to criticizing The Science of Cookies
925 - Make it more expensive
926 - "Must use research"
927 - No evidence vs it doesn't work
928 - Gifts from the industry do not influence mypractice
929 - Best or only option known to work?
930 - Compulsory reading I suggest not
931 - Trained as a research illustrator, really?
932 - Cost-effectiveness correlation?
933 - Who are you, curious readers?
934 - Treatment and indication creep
935 - What is the most important study to draw?
936 - There is never enough training
937 - Pre-diagnosis, pre-diseases
938 - Nobody draws health recommendations, dissemination idea
939 - Evidence Based Medicine symbols
940 - Anyone can illustrate research studies
941 - There is more thought in this than might appear
942 - Exposing lies exposes people
943 Overdiagnosis illustration [EN & FR]
944 - Using technology because we can
945 - Once revealed never concealed
946 - Don't use this statistical test
947 - What are you measuring with this scale?
948 - Over a million drawings later
949 - Interrupted thoughts
950 - Comics have a fatal weakness

951-1000


951 - Clinical trial report vs study report
952 - Learning to read research comics
953 - Use judgment
954 - A journal for everyone
955 - Unknown unknowns again
956 - Suggesting improvements, who can do that?
957 - Inertia and traditions
958 - What should the drawings focus on?
959 - Shortcuts were used to decide who got funding
960 - We identified fraud and then we don't say
961 - Symbols used may matter
962 - Episode 2009, 85% of biomedical research is a waste
963 - This is too long, this is too short
964 - Deprescribing yes but I need some details
965 - It took me a year to write a 1-hour review
966 - Comics reading group
967 - Treatment advocacy gone wrong
968 - High risk, high reward projects
969 - Data sharing is easy when colleagues are involved
970 - MY DATA, MINE, PRECIOUS!
971 - It doesn't have to be personal
972 - Indirect funding
973 - Funding will come later
974 - Keep it simple, keep it cleaner than real
975 - Build a positive relationship with authors
976 - Did it not happen? Or was it not reported?
977 - Intentional errors included
978 - I'll do good science later, I promise
979 - Towards understanding the de-adoption of low-value clinical practices: a scoping review
980 - Qualitative data [n980]
981 - Reviewer 1 asked for it
982 - Too abstract to be taught, really?
983 - History repeats itself
984 - Work within the system or build a new one
985 - Did you consider [Important Issues] in your study?
986 - Access to the literature is a meter away
987 - Correct the literature but start elsewhere
988 - Research what you can?
989 - Frustration flows into the comics
990 - Contradictory feedback
991 - Only fund the best projects, now that's easy to say
992 - MORE GUIDELINES!!!
993 - Clear for whom?
994 - Incoming disasters
995 - Defend scientists, defend the search for Truth
996 - A couple more references to add
997 - An old idea: Scientific studies to communicate research
998 - Unsatisfied people flawing your trial
999 - This illustration came too early
1000 - I won't be there forever, nor will my skills

1001-1050


1001 - Expensive research but good too?
1002 - Hiding plagiarism in plain sight
1003 - Research is fun depends on how you contribute
1004 - At some point maybe I should stop for the benefit of all
1005 - Prove you can draw this!
1006 - Too much of an expert to have a say
1007 - The selection of assessors was biased
1008 - Research knowledge is (potential) power
1009 - Discoveries rest on one or many
1010 - Indirect side effect
1011 - Let us show you the value of research!
1012 - Quickly done or poorly done?
1013 - This artist just failed
1014 - Overbooked with diagnoses
1015 - Recruitment was slow
1016 - Old studies or old studies?
1017 - He/She/They won't collaborate
1018 - Unrelated answers
1019 - Dodging conflicts of interests is a challenge
1020 - You will need a certificate. Maybe
1021 - First to act responsibly
1022 - Asking questions with answers you might not understand
1023 - Can't dedicate this life to comics
1024 - I hear voices and they tell me "IMPROVE THIS"
1025 - Illustrators shielding themselves from industry biases
1026 - Use as you see fit
1027 - When is it too young to learn this?
1028 - Combining comics
1029 - Poor study illustration
1030 - Treasures anyone has access to
1031 - How much do you really want to know about this study?
1032 - Learning is breathing
1033 - A good story or a scientific story?
1034 - Printing research comics on your walls
1035 - Anyone can comment this illustration
1036 - Randomised controlled trial explained in a brochure [Untranslated]
1037 - Predicting what people will do with this tool
1038 - Participant coercion (unvoluntary)
1039 - Feedback > gold
1040 - Is this for university/school?
1041 - A matter of outcome interpretation
1042 - A comic for the primary investigator
1043 - Research escape room
1044 - Stats door guardian
1045 - Join the study or else...
1046 - Adventure book: Clinical trials
1047 - Trial design
1048 - Prevention and management of unprofessional behaviour among adults in the workplace
1049 - Self regulation
1050 - Textbook intros gotta be positive

1051-1100


1051 - This is a bad source because we say so
1052 - Ghost authors
1053 - Expert in explaining how it ought to work
1054 - Without us you have no power!
1055 - Study status: progress
1056 - Pseudoscience is mandatory
1057 - Public and not so public comments
1058 - Important things first... who will be first author?
1059 - Miranda whatever warning
1060 - The more you read the less you read
1061 - Nudge, nudge, nudge, nudge, nudge, do open science
1062 - Flawed by well-meaning individuals
1063 - But why backgrounds?
1064 - Realistic backgrounds, yey or nay?
1065 - Find the 7 differences and be attentive to details
1066 - Science corrects itself when?
1067 - Thinking about you
1068 - Ancients' wisdom
1069 - Science is a team activity
1070 - Feasibility is a concern
1071 - Everyone can peer-review
1072 - EBM Rally
1073 - So they have holidays too...
1074 - It takes longer to assess than to create
1075 - This theory needs to die
1076 - A well-meaning teaching strategy
1077 - An ivory tower far away
1078 - We don't like innovation
1079 - Important but too complicated
1080 - Privacy helps
1081 - Not failing enough
1082 - If everyone was a researcher we could...
1083 - Longer life or better life?
1084 - They didn't reply to my emails
1085 - Importance varies
1086 - Supporting core ideas of research
1087 - Survival analysis of readers
1088 - What is the least you should draw?
1089 - Lead-time bias
1090 - Pubmed search game
1091 - Munchkin inspired research card game
1092 - Some comics ought to be bad
1093 - Rediscovered 30 years later
1094 - Looking for uncertainty
1095 - Conflicts not sought, not reported
1096 - How do you check my conflicts?
1097 - Bring more context
1098 - Idea builder
1099 - "Core" journals
1100 - This reviewer is known to me

1101-1150


1101 - Learn epidemiology during train rides
1102 - Unthankful job
1103 - Collector
1104 - "Complex" interventions
1105 - How many books before I understand?
1106 - First care, then maybe (perhaps) research
1107 - Trust your profession
1108 - Exaggerated exaggerations
1109 - Memory issues
1110 - Teach what is important to students
1111 - We don't read the same way
1112 - One more question survey
1113 - My theory is better than yours!
1114 - Free recall EBM
1115 - Expert in nothing at all
1116 - Too late to correct
1117 - Quality varies within
1118 - Research can begin at a young age
1119 - A logical preventive strategy
1120 - 2 years later everything will have to be updated
1121 - Keep it as a bad example
1122 - Learning is the easy part
1123 - A poor selection test
1124 - How to combine comics and real life
1125 - Registry entry needs clarity
1126 - ONE decision aid
1127 - Core ideas change over time
1128 - Wasting brains
1129 - Harms will come later on
1130 - How far can you get with "what ifs"?
1131 - Others would be harmed if we disclosed this error
1132 - High level of certainty analogy
1133 - Maybe I should try to be famous?
1134 - Reminder: Question your practices
1135 - What follows is the unknown
1136 - TIdieR checklist: Epic item
1137 - Risk of bias assessment in a randomized controlled trial: Loci method
1138 - What does a trial cost?
1139 - Citizen scientists' hobbies
1140 - The key to nuance is?
1141 - If you do research on my comics I do research on you too
1142 - Minimally important difference in knowledge gain
1143 - Overdiagnosis illustration puzzle makes you attentive to details
1144 - Some questions take longer to answer
1145 - Question (others') practices
1146 - It becomes too easy...
1147 - But what did they check?
1148 - All he wants is attention
1149 - Can't specialize in everything
1150 - Research methodologists

1151-1200


1151 - There is enough unreliable data
1152 - Is it worth describing things in more details?
1153 - Random reference chosen
1154 - Excellent recruitment didn't suffice
1155 - Delayed impact
1156 - The Science of Cookies is ever incomplete
1157 - Dilute the outcome through many measures
1158 - Barrier to research progress
1159 - The ceiling was reached already
1160 - Publications needed for the job
1161 - Outcome myopia and unintended consequences
1162 - Upolished data is real data
1163 - Some things don't reproduce, I'm not telling you which
1164 - Impossible guarantees
1165 - Knowledge loss
1166 - Medical records for research
1167 - As far as I am aware...
1168 - "Cheating" is welcome as long as it is admitted
1169 - My week in 3 drawings
1170 - This comic is research
1171 - The game me her DOI number
1172 - Trust the evidence (but only believe the experts I show you!)
1173 - Our name matters a lot
1174 - Are other correlations spurious?
1175 - The wrong statistical test should be used
1176 - Subgroup effects with a straightforward mechanism
1177 - Participating in research could/should be made fun
1178 - Stop hiding your comics, researchers!
1179 - Conferences by proxy
1180 - His English is poor, that's why
1181 - Easy to understand for whom?
1182 - Paid to publish anything
1183 - Truth and only truth we shall seek
1184 - Unpublished proof can be refuted with...
1185 - Only money is a financial conflict, she says
1186 - I want to be randomized!
1187 - When was it last updated?
1188 - Transparent as long as it is beneficial to us
1189 - Anecdote: Drawing a study doesn't help me remember it
1190 - Evidence based practice "executioners"?
1191 - University kills my interest in research
1192 - Guidelines will change practices, or will they?
1193 - The waiting strategy
1194 - Save your field before you need to burn it down
1195 - A sweet sight
1196 - The guild of citizen scientists
1197 - Do you adhere to future standards?
1198 - A million studies for what?
1199 - Use fewer references
1200 - Who ever disagrees?

1201-1250


1201 - Hard to solve problems
1202 - How much lower would the costs be if...?
1203 - Comics get their author's reputation
1204 - "It was a pleasant experience" issue
1205 - Battery level critical
1206 - Research autopsy
1207 - Data not shared is data...
1208 - Staying polite
1209 - Pre-req training
1210 - Final results won't please many
1211 - Randomized controled trial ongoing
1212 - "Maybe or maybe not" study protocols
1213 - Publishing many reports based on the same data
1214 - Can't say that, my English is too poor
1215 - Pick a limitation
1216 - More and more regulations
Conference EBM Live 1
Conference EBM Live 2
1219 - The way I read changes over time
1220 - Word limits
1221 - Meta-researcher
1222 - Treat before natural history takes care of it
1223 - Unexpected effects of being a university student
1224 - Stats are easy... until they aren't
1225 - Who cares about communicating results?
1226 - Funny research comics
1227 - Randomisation table
1228 - Health authorities audit drug trial
1229 - Effective but a pain to teach
1230 - Pseudo-editor
1231 - "Waiting to be reproduced"
1232 - RetractionWatch database of retracted studies
1233 - Wikipedia and researchers meet
1234 - Post-market studies
1235 - Doubt is more affordable
1236 - My intuition is fantastic
1237 - In the shadows they shall remain
1238 - Glory for firsts, nothing for seconds
1239 - Intervention changing too quickly
1240 - Being precise is not enough
1241 - Too expensive, don't check if it works
Conference EBM Live 3 - Some thoughts on the 2018 Cochrane Colloquium
Conference EBM Live 4 - But where are you going?
Conference EBM Live 5 - Chill is the way to go
Conference EBM Live 6 - A strategic schedule
Conference EBM Live 7 - Onwards!
Conference EBM Live 8 - Travel time means drawing time
Conference EBM Live 9 - Things keep happening even when you close your eyes
Conference EBM Live 10 - You can't think ahead of all the details
Conference EBM Live 11 - An advice you should not follow

1251-1300


Conference EBM Live 12 - Getting to Oxford is something to celebrate!
Conference EBM Live 13 - First steps in Oxford
Conference EBM Live 14 - Getting prepared
Conference EBM Live 15 - "Only" a conference
Conference EBM Live 16 - The strength of stereotypes
Conference EBM Live 17 - First misstep
Conference EBM Live 18 - Where do I know you from?
Conference EBM Live 19 - Garside R. Qualitative evidence synthesis
Conference EBM Live 20 - Everyone can hear you anyway (or can they?)
Conference EBM Live 21 - But what should I draw, actually?
Conference EBM Live 22 - Gartlehner G. Answering questions from the public
Conference EBM Live 23 - Gartlehner G. European laws
Conference EBM Live 24 - Coffee time!
Conference EBM Live 25 - Tricco A. Looking for the right question
Conference EBM Live 26 - Tricco A. Take the time to do things well
Conference EBM Live 27 - Transition
Conference EBM Live 28 - Arienti C. Difficulties in reproducing rehabilitation interventions
Conference EBM Live 29 - Moving from room to room
Conference EBM Live 30 - "Lightning" talks
Conference EBM Live 31 - Say who you are first
Conference EBM Live 32 - Brassey, J. Better ways to find the evidence
Conference EBM Live 33 - Stephenson, T. Reducing Questionable Research Practices and Bias
Conference EBM Live 34 - Stephenson, T. Reducing Questionable Research Practices and Bias p2
Conference EBM Live 35 - Reboot
Conference EBM Live 36 - Improving the reporting of harms
Conference EBM Live 37 - McCulloch, P. IDEAL and Research Waste in the Study of Complex Interventions
Conference EBM Live 38 - McCulloch, P. IDEAL and Research Waste in the Study of Complex Interventions p2
Conference EBM Live 39 - End of the first day
Conference EBM Live 40 - Initial drawings
Conference EBM Live 41 - Allen, C. The use of evidence in humanitarian response decision making
Conference EBM Live 42 - Note taking
Conference EBM Live 43 - Is more education THE solution?
Conference EBM Live 44 - Fechtelpeter, D. Decision aids for organized cancer screening in Germany
Conference EBM Live 45 - Already too used to conferences
Conference EBM Live 46 - Vandvik, P. O. BMJ Rapid Recommendations
Conference EBM Live 47 - Vandvik, P. O. BMJ Rapid Recommendations p2
Conference EBM Live 48 - Adler, A. Assessment of state-supported treatments
Conference EBM Live 49 - Inclusion
Conference EBM Live 50 - Other attendees
Conference EBM Live 51 - Wicks, P. “What’s in it for us? Conditional altruism and the social contract of research participation”
Conference EBM Live 52 - Wicks, P. “What’s in it for us? Conditional altruism and the social contract of research participation” p2
Conference EBM Live 53 - Survey
Conférence EBM Live 54 - Wicks, P. “What’s in it for us? Conditional altruism and the social contract of research participation” p3
Conference EBM Live 55 - Goldacre, B. How to make summary results available
Conference EBM Live 56 - Goldacre, B. How to make summary results available p2
Conference EBM Live 57 - Devito, N. How to make summary results available p3
Conference EBM Live 58 - Drysdale, H. How to make summary results available p4
Conference EBM Live 59 - Down the rabbit hole
Conference EBM Live 60 - Deveson, P. The history of conflicts of interests
Conference EBM Live 61 - Deveson, P. The history of conflicts of interests p2

1301-1350


Conference EBM Live 62 - Comments "questions"
Conference EBM Live 63 - Boutron, I. "Spin" or the distortion of research results
Conference EBM Live 64 - Lenzer, J. 17 years spent investigating biases and (legal) fraud in research
Conference EBM Live 65 - Lenzer, J. 17 years spent investigating biases and (legal) fraud in research p2
Conference EBM Live 66 - Mandeville, K. Conflicts of interest: The next frontier for disclosure
Conference EBM Live 67 - Mandeville, K. Conflicts of interest: The next frontier for disclosure p2
Conference EBM Live 68 - Conflicts of interests: Together we shall build the future
Conference EBM Live 69 - Conflicts of interests: Together we shall build the future p2
Conference EBM Live 70 - Conflicts of interests: Together we shall build the future p3
Conference EBM Live 71 - Conflicts of interests: Together we shall build the future p4
Conference EBM Live 72 - Conflicts of interests: Together we shall build the future p5
Conference EBM Live 73 - Conflicts of interests: Together we shall build the future p6
Conference EBM Live 74 - Conflicts of interests: Together we shall build the future p7
Conference EBM Live 75 - Ksenia, E. Evidence Based Medicine in Russia
Conference EBM Live 76 - Nullus in verba
Conference EBM Live 77 - "No need to assess my idea"
Conference EBM Live 78 - Ioannidis, J. P. A. Reproducible Evidence for Healthcare
Conference EBM Live 79 - Ioannidis, J. P. A. Reproducible Evidence for Healthcare p2
Conference EBM Live 80 - Ioannidis, J. P. A. Reproducible Evidence for Healthcare p3
Conference EBM Live 81 - Ioannidis, J. P. A. Reproducible Evidence for Healthcare p4
Conference EBM Live 82 - Strong and weak points of EBM Live 2019
Conference EBM Live 83 - Future awaits!
Conference EBM Live 84 - High value thoughts
Conference EBM Live 85 - Going back home
Conference EBM Live 86 - Out-of-context citations
Conference EBM Live 87 - Recall questions
Conference EBM Live 88 - The-day-after syndrome
1328 - Transition 1
1329 - Transition 2
1330 - Transition 3
1331 - Transition 4
1332 - Transition 5
1333 - Transition 6
1334 - Transition 7
1335 - Transition 8
1336 - Transition 9
1337 - Transition 10 - CC-BY-SA
1338 - Transition 11 - English has come!
1339 - Transition 11 - And French is on a leave
1340 - Comics shall now be in English, okay but...
1341 - Concerns about French readers
1342 - What do you translate or not and past mistakes
1343 - Maybe I did warn myself about it...
1344 - Embrace uncertainty (and maybe listen to what you wrote in the past)
1345 - Moving on
1346 - Joining #FridaysForFuture?
1347 - Stronger as a team but there is more...
1348 - Is joining a movement about anecdotes?
1349 - Remember the end goal
1350 - Picking the best strategy, not just the ones I know about

1351-1400


1351 - Opportunity costs and real life
1352 - How could YOU best contribute, given your abilities?
1353 - A platform for research on climate change p1
1354 - A platform for research on climate change p2
1355 - A platform for research on climate change p3
1356 - A platform for research on climate change p4
1357 - A platform for research on climate change p5
1358 - A platform for research on climate change p6
1359 - A platform for research on climate change p7
1360 - A platform for research on climate change p8
1361 - A platform for research on climate change p9
1362 - A platform for research on climate change p10 (Ending)
1363 - Cherry picking criticisms
1364 - Randomized trials you can try at home
1365 - How should I appraise this study?
1366 - Our field is too different from other ones
1367 - Beliefs change over time
1368 - When citizen science evolves...
1369 - A biography about whom, exactly?
1370 - The original was good, what about the others?
1371 - Keeping my hobbies hidden
1372 - The duty of the first pioneers
1373 - To the edge of knowledge
1374 - Come join us at the edge!
1375 - Ethical disagreements
1376 - Excessively broad criterias
1377 - Data, everything is data!
1378 - The geocache of forking paths
1379 - But how were these search results ranked?
1380 - Adjudicating harms
1381 - How many studies is enough?
1382 - How "little" do you know?
1383 - This agency does her job too well
1384 - Keeping a neutral view on journals
1385 - Job security or the benefit of all?
1386 - Data was archived as per legal requirements
1387 - A long lineage of meta-researchers
1388 - Not an expert
1389 - It's not such a bold idea as it looks like
1390 - Problems in their field are their problems
1391 - The answer is somewhere in there
1392 - On what evidence did you rely to build the Cochrane Collaboration?
1393 - Five publications per year quota
1394 - The 1 in a 1000
1395 - There is a conference for everyone
1396 - Send them to the studies or to the flaws?
1397 - Reasons for not coming
1398 - Quit studying to study more?
1399 - I need to breathe
1400 - Retractions are progress

1401-1450


1401 - When heroes become humans again
1402 - At which point is it worth going to this conference?
1403 - The last thoughts of a data scientist
1404 - Bold claims require strong evidence
1405 - Citations flow over the years
1406 - Just ask the ethics committee
1407 - Who cannot read the results?
1408 - They prefered misunderstanding
1409 - Strongest scientific contribution isn't research
1410 - Data sharing won't fix everything
1411 - Stereotypes against scientists
1412 - Use resources at your disposal
1413 - Only the comic strip illustrator knew
1414 - Opportunistic places to learn
1415 - The ethics committee won't understand
1416 - You can't do it all alone, but can you lead it all alone?
1417 - It is too late to test this new intervention
1418 - Well done research, but something important was missing
1419 - My trust is something you earn, not something you deserve
1420 - Opportunities weren't equal
1421 - Farewell, my heroes
1422 - Not all that is on Wikipedia is current
1423 - Open the sequentially numbered envelopes as instructed
1424 - Unstoppable will to do something else
1425 - Game of Incentives
1426 - A stranger among strangers
1427 - I've cracked the code, nothing can block me!
1428 - Self-doubt creeps in again
1429 - Ask a methodologist maybe?
1430 - I can do it all, but maybe not all the time
1431 - "Because I'm the one teaching"?
1432 - Approved as an exception
1433 - Assessing researchers based on ALL they have done
1434 - I'll analyze the data wrongly if I want
1435 - I'll analyze the data wrongly if I want p2
1436 - Better conference posters
1437 - Everything was a misunderstanding
1438 - The focus was finishing her master's thesis, not reducing waste
1439 - It doesn't stay "new" for long
1440 - You don't have the authority to prevent waste
1441 - Reviewers disagree
1442 - Different study design, same issues
1443 - Borderline clever
1444 - The unknown is the fun part
1445 - Pick a mentor
1446 - Driven by complexity
1447 - Halloween 2019
1448 - On reasonable request
1449 - This peer-review wasn't worth it
1450 - Smallest publishable unit

1451-1500


1451 - There are good and less good times to read research
1452 - Under review until [insert date]
1453 - I've got a comic strip on this!
1454 - Moving beyond "Can you do it?"
1455 - Use only n references
1456 - How good are these comics?
1457 - Can't tweet this
1458 - More citations more visibility
1459 - Correctly citing retracted studies
1460 - How fake is this conference?
1461 - The 24h sciart challenge
1462 - Close to the statistical threshold
1463 - Consider p-values given [context]
1464 - Not intrinsically better ideas
1465 - Methods will be published
1466 - How inclusive was this conference?
1467 - More time for research, less time for ...?
1468 - Please give me an infrastructure, not a single study
1469 - Teaching the teacher how to teach
1470 - Unpublished results wasted my death
1471 - Surrogate outcomes p1
1472 - Surrogate outcomes p2
1473 - Surrogate outcomes p3
1474 - Surrogate outcomes p4
1475 - Surrogate outcomes p5
1476 - Surrogate outcomes p6
1477 - Was that a date or a data analyst?
1478 - Forgotten experiments that never worked
1479 - Healthy anomalies
1480 - Differential follow-up duration
1481 - Repeat until you get it wrong by chance
1482 - Start small and incremental improvements
1483 - The day they became "normal"
1484 - Academics becoming too remote from clinical practice
1485 - Anonymization was done
1486 - Your best collaborator is yourself 6 months ago
1487 - Subjective field boundaries
1488 - Are your past publications a good representation of what you currently believe?
1489 - Covid-19 productivity gap
1490 - Are you listening to other fields of research?
1491 - Protected by research or protected from research?
1492 - What isn't on your flashcards?
1493 - How does it feel when authors don't take your comments into account?
1494 - Informative journal titles
1495 - Mandatory fields to register for a research conference
1496 - Old research in the times of Covid-19
1497 - References were selected purposefuly
1498 - Attending online research conferences is so difficult...
1499 - Unlikely to ever be reproduced
1500 - Getting into pet project troubles

1501-1550


1501 - How to get your research funded, comic 640 returns!
1502 - Everything gets "covidized"
1503 - When all studies focus on one thing and one thing only
1504 - When one treatment gets almost all the attention
1505 - Can't think clearly
1506 - Criticizing what one can criticize
1507 - Peer-reviewing manuscripts out of certain death
1508 - Collecting more data was a distraction
1509 - Looking for state funding
1510 - Claiming a level of in-depth knowledge
1511 - Learning practical skills through research
1512 - Working with disappearing tools
1513 - Backup, backup, backup
1514 - A doctoral undergraduate thesis
1515 - Path of least ethical resistance
1516 - Feeling left out of the research field
1517 - Priviledged
1518 - Data validation
1519 - Not expecting citations
1520 - Peer reviewers' efforts
1521 - Nobody will like you afterwards
1522 - Unfundable
1523 - Unregulated use
1524 - Should be blow up the study?
1525 - Journals are demeaning
1526 - Measuring social things
1527 - If others do it, why can't I?
1528 - Raw qualitative data will be plenty enough
1529 - Supportive managers
1530 - I don't know the harms of what we do
1531 - Publication bias recruitment question
1532 - Ask us first
1533 - Just a few data please
1534 - Beyond scales
1535 - Some data shared after all
1536 - There is maybe research on this topic
1537 - Useful research skills
1538 - Fancy prereq
1539 - Reading will not be an absolute priority
1540 - Religiously believing
1541 - Research is impacting home life
1542 - Discovery is addictive
1543 - Vague
1544 - Absolutely not fraud
1545 - The right research shortcut
1546 - Silent knowledge
1547 - This way is the only way
1548 - The power of mentors over methods
1549 - Not guaranteed to turn into a great practitioner
1550 - Reading at work

1551-1600


1551 - Who know this study was retracted?
1552 - Time spent learning nothing new
1553 - The value of not reading something
1554 - Too mobile for long-term research?
1555 - Well advertised, much wanted?