Test 1 Flashcards
misinformation
accidental spreading of wrong information (not purposeful)
Disinformation
porposeful speard of wrong information
infodemic
lots of information is available- mis and misinformation existed beofre (ie snake juice) nut now it can be spead a lot more easily and faster
Tips on stopping the spread (of fake news)
- acess the source
- go beyond the headline
- identify the author
- check the date (how recent)
- examine the supporting evidence
- check biases
- turn on fact checkers
fake inforamtion example Hydroxyxhloroquine and ivermectin
gained traction as a potential treatment for covid
some promosing results (very early on)- limited studies, poorly designed studies
Eventually-
better designed studies and more of them- did not support hte use of it
growing disconnect with science
-want concrete answers (yes or no), but they rarely exisit
-research provides :evidence”
-Live in a world of statistics (probability)
-no such thing as scientific prrof
-Healthy scepticism is what science is build upon
scientific literacy can mean…
many things
What is scientific literacy
a skill set and mondset that will support problem solving and making intelligent, informaed decisons
A way of thinking that is more logical, with healthy level of skepticism
Impact your daily life and career
intuition
Draw general conclusions based on emotions and instincts (one way vs another)
can be based on past experiences/partial evidence
authority
statements from authorities must be true
persuasion is the not same as credibility - lots of credible people are not persuasive (and vise versa)
Rationalsim
reason/logic to draw conclusions (without actually seening anything)
–> if this, then this
but need to conside if inital premise is wrong– then logic falls flat
Empriricism
making conclusions through structured observations
-different than anecdotal evidence
*scientific process
The scientific approach
is grounded in empiricism
but also relies on rationalism, authority and intiution
reuqires healthy skepticism
-cant blindly accept what you read
-evaluate the basics of logic and the quality of scientific results (is it consistent with other work in the feild)
The scientific approach- circle (process)
Systematic set of principles and procedures for generating knowledge
observation–> question–> hypothesis–> experience–> analysis–> conclusion–>
The pseudo-scientific approach
-hypotheiss not testable
-methods are not scientific or validity of data is questionable
-evidence is anecdotal
-heavy focus on “experts”, not scientific references
-ignores conflicting evidence
-uses many “scientific sounding” terms/ideas
-claims are vague
Common misinterpretations of scientific data
many wats scienfific findings can be lost in translation
-Sicentific misinterpretation
ie correlation vs causation, confounding variables, statistical signficance
-Overgeneralizations
ie a single study is rarely confirmatory , results may apply to a specific group
Statistical misinterpreation- correlation vs causation
correlation: a relationship between 2 measures
reported as a correlation coefficeint (0= not related; 1= perfectly related)
Statistical misinterpreation- ignoring confounding variables
other variables that may also influence the relationship but are not the primary focus
Statistical significance
-describes how likely what we observed is due to chance
-Our confidence in our results
-realtes to p-values– p=0.05 threshold used in most research- highly debated
-influenced by the average scores, how much they vary and the number of scores collected
what does a smaller p-value indicate
less likely that results are obtained by chance- more evidence
the importance of variability in statistical significance
two studes with the same results (ie same weight lost) may have different p-values. Same mean between both sets but the variability between participants varries- less variation= more confident
importance of sample size in statistical significance
a daaset witht he same mean- one with a larger sample size will have a smaller p value
statistical significance vs importance
conside 6.2 vs 5.8lbs of weight loss between experiental and control group. Although this difference is statiscally significant, it is unlikely to be clinacally signifciant- also play a role when considering treatment options.
overgeneralizing- a single study
is rarely confirmatory
-each individual study provides incremental evidence
-best to examine the entrie body of evidence
overgeneralizing- specific groups
results may apply to a specifc group
-studies are usually very specific in their recomendations
-media is usually not as specific in their interpretation
* mouse vs human models
research and levels of evidence- important considerations
every study is not created equally- important to understnad limitations
research is incremental- built on previous findings
levels of evidence- summary pyramid
quality increases up to level 1
level 5: evidence from expert options
level 4: case studies/ cross sectional
level3: cohort studies
level 2: randomized control trials
level 1: reviews/meta-analysis
cohort studies
-Groups of people observed over time
-Everyone is free of disease at onset, but differ in exposure (yes or no)
-Exposure: smokers vs non-smpkers; Disease/outcomes: cancer
Advantages of Cohort Studies
-Establish temporal relationship between exposure (smoking) and outcom (cancer)
-evidence towards cause and effect- not 100% evidence for cuase and effect
Limitations of cohort studies
-Expensive/ time consuming
-Difficult for rare disorders
-can be confounded with addtional factors
ie smokers inherently different from non-smokers to begin with?
did they engage in otehr activities that put them at greater risk
Randomized control trials
Randomly assigned to groups (gets treatment); other is control (no treatment)
-Random assignment is necessary
Placebo is important (single vs double blind)
Can be difficult with exercise interventions/surgery
Advantages of Randomized control trials
-highly controlled
-best designed for cause and effect
-randomization elimiates (or minimizes) confounding varables
Limitations of Randomized control trials
-Not always possible and/or practical (ie smoking)
-Ethical considerations
-Need people to follow their assignment
systematic reviews and meta-analyses
-Search out all studies on a given topic to summarize the findings
-Systematic reviews can be qualitative or quantitative
-Meta-analysis= quantitative pooling of results. Provides highest level of evidence
-Reviews are a great place to start when interested in a given topic
