AW: [ RadSafe ] AW: How much of RSH still exists?

[Rainer.Facius at dlr.de]

John:

 

"My understanding is that this is a mega-analysis of previously published studies."

 

Yes, the Cardis BMJ 2005 study comprises populations for which previously individual analyses have been published. 

 

No, this one is not a meta-analysis of these previous studies. It is a new compilation of updated data from the respective populations established according to joint protocols and methods of analysis.

 

What has been published in BMJ cannot be criticised properly because it does not give sufficient primary data.

 

Kind regards, Rainer

 

________________________________

Von: John Jacobus [mailto:crispy_bird at yahoo.com]
Gesendet: Sa 24.09.2005 22:12
An: Facius, Rainer; feinendegen at gmx.net; higsond at bigpond.net.au; rad-sci-l at WPI.EDU; radsafe at radlab.nl
Betreff: RE: [ RadSafe ] AW: How much of RSH still exists?



Rainier,
Thank you for the reply and your comments. I do not
follow many of the epidemiological publications. My
understanding is that this is a mega-analysis of
previously published studies. I have only a
rudimentary understanding of epidemiological studies.
I would think that those who know more than I would be
better qualified to analyze this report. Do you expect
this will happen based of the journal source, e.g., a
not epidemiological journal? If it is not critized,
does that mean its anaylsis is valid?