Skip Navigation

Breaking Down Cass Review Myths and Misconceptions: What You Need to Know – The Quackometer

Seen the "98% of studies were ignored!" one doing the rounds on social media. The editorial in the BMJ put it in much better terms:

"One emerging criticism of the Cass review is that it set the methodological bar too high for research to be included in its analysis and discarded too many studies on the basis of quality. In fact, the reality is different: studies in gender medicine fall woefully short in terms of methodological rigour; the methodological bar for gender medicine studies was set too low, generating research findings that are therefore hard to interpret."

54

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context
54 comments
You've viewed 54 comments.