We May Not Understand Control Groups

Discussions praising the efficiency of randomized trials are widespread, however, few of these discussions take a close look at some of the common assumptions that individuals hold regarding randomized trials. And unfortunately, these common assumptions may be based on outdated evidence and simplistic ideas.

The Bradford Hill Criteria Don’t Hold Up

The Bradford Hill Criteria are commonly used as a checklist to argue for causality when randomized trials aren’t possible. However, the originator of these viewpoints never intended for them to be used this way. In this post, I examine the shortcomings of using these viewpoints as a checklist in the real world.

Exercise, Mental Health, and Big Data

Recently, a large cross-sectional study that investigated the relationship between exercise frequency and mental health was published in The Lancet Psychiatry and also happened to set Twitter on fire. I want to discuss the good and the not so good.

How Useful Is Nutritional Epidemiology?

The studies that gain the most attention from the media are usually nutritional epidemiological studies and these studies make everyone reconsider their beliefs about nutrition. However, there is a good reason to be skeptical of these types of studies and in this blog post, I explain why.

Myth: Covariates Need to Be Balanced in RCTs

Many people believe that the purpose of randomization is to perfectly balance out both known and unknown covariates in order to reach causal inferences, however, this is simply not true and is a misunderstanding of the process of randomization.