Lorenzo Lolli

🚨LEAD FEATURE ARTICLE🚨 November 2025✨

We are very excited to announce our lead feature article for the November 2025 by Lolli et al titled ‘Understanding Treatment Response Heterogeneity Using Crossover Randomized Controlled Trials: A Primer for Exercise and Nutrition Scientists’.

Q.E.D.

Guidelines for Meta-analyses and Systematic Reviews in Urology Our guideline comprises points addressing the conduct and interpretation of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in urology. Application of the guideline would lead to a more considered interpretation...

This is big! Worked with great statisticians on guidelines for meta-analysis & systematic review. We discuss rationales for systematic review, evaluation & interpretation of heterogeneity, & common errors in network meta-analysis, funnel plots etc. www.europeanurology.com/article/S030...

✨ NOVEMBER 2025 ISSUE LINE-UP✨

How are we already on the last issue of 2025?! This year has flown by but lucky for you, the IJSNEM content keeps on delivering. Stay tuned for papers to feature 🔔

Reviewing trial applications and so many are proposing to use mixed effects models with random effects for sites due to "clustering" despite 1) being individually-randomized, and 2) only having a small handful of sites. What is going on!?

“When faced with claims of innovation, some in their caution make nuanced assessments, whereas others in their enthusiasm make newanced endorsements.”Saying of Confuseus

We didn't randomize, and there was no allocation concealment or blinding, and we can't really be sure what intervention they got or how the outcomes were measured, but we emulated a trial by drawing a DAG.

They who are tempted by large language muddles should consider using nopilot.” Sayings of Confuseus

It was a rewarding labour of love to work on this paper with a fantastic team of authors, “Understanding Treatment Response Heterogeneity Using Crossover Randomized Controlled Trials: A Primer for Exercise and Nutrition Scientists”. @hk-ijsnem.bsky.social journals.humankinetics.com/view/journal...

I decided to make the introductory part in three segments: (1) logic (just the basics obviously) (2) epistemology (Vienna circle, K-Pop, Kuhn, Lakatos) and (3) what actually happens in practice (the “recipes for science” angle).>

On the defense of "change from baseline" even in randomized trials - can anyone question points in this article? Many times I read a strong criticism on the change-from-baseline (adjusted for baseline or not) both in randomized and non-randomized. Several people advised "don't even think of reporting the

Good discussion here about what’s wrong with computing change from baseline in a parallel group randomized clinical trial. We need to abandon this practice. stats.stackexchange.com/questions/57... #Statistics #StatsSky

1/6. At present, I am thinking a lot about additive vs multiplicative treatment/intervention effects on tests of athletic performance, or athletic performance itself. I favour exploration rather than blanket assumptions.......

Tackling paper mills requires us to prevent future contamination and clean up the past – the case of the journal Bioengineered Taylor & Francis journal Bioengineered has been targeted by paper mills. Our goal is to identify problematic articles published in Bioengineered during the period 2010 to 2024. Dimensions was used ...

New paper:

Tackling paper mills requires us to prevent future contamination and clean up the past – the case of the journal Bioengineered

With @deadneanderthals.bsky.social, @smutclyde.bsky.social, @mortenoxe.bsky.social, @thatsregrettab1.bsky.social, and me

www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....

Tackling paper mills requires us to prevent future contamination and clean up the past – the case of the journal Bioengineered Taylor & Francis journal Bioengineered has been targeted by paper mills. Our goal is to identify problematic articles published in Bioengineered during the period 2010 to 2024. Dimensions was used ...

The paper @elisabethbik.bsky.social, @mortenoxe.bsky.social @thatsregrettab1.bsky.social, @smutclyde.bsky.social, and I wrote together on the troubles over at Bioengineered has now officially been published by... Bioengineered!

www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....

Individual Therapy: New Dawn or False Dawn? - Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science The sequencing of the human genome brings with it the hope that greater understanding of genetic components of disease will allow the more specific targeting of therapies. It has also been suggested t...

Key remarks relevant to avoid unnecessary confusion in clinical trial settings between any endeavor to explore a 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻 𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗲𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗰𝘁 compared to the more complex examination of 𝙙𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙣𝙘𝙩 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙤𝙣𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙨 𝙤𝙛 𝙫𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 requiring careful research design considerations for (𝒑𝒐𝒕𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒂𝒍?) 𝙥𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙤𝙣𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙯𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣.

Repeated measures in clinical trials: simple strategies for analysis using summary measures The summary measures approach to analysing repeated measures is described. The circumstances under which it can be advantageous to use such measures are considered. Strategies for baseline adjustment...

“The 𝙛𝙞𝙧𝙨𝙩 is to describe what the effect of treatment was 𝙤𝙫𝙚𝙧 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙧𝙨𝙚 𝙤𝙛 𝙖 𝙨𝙩𝙪𝙙𝙮.

The 𝒔𝒆𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒅 is to describe what effect the treatment had attained 𝒃𝒚 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒆𝒏𝒅 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒕𝒖𝒅𝒚.”

“Neither 𝙢𝙚𝙖𝙣𝙨 nor 𝒔𝒍𝒐𝒑𝒆𝒔 are likely to describe perfectly the way in which the effect of treatment 𝙫𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙚𝙨 with time.

In this connection it is useful to distinguish two common purposes of summaries.”

Page 868 in “Senn S, Stevens L, Chaturvedi N. Repeated measures in clinical trials: simple strategies for analysis using summary measures. Stat Med. 2000 Mar 30;19(6):861-77.”

Page 869 in “Senn S, Stevens L, Chaturvedi N. Repeated measures in clinical trials: simple strategies for analysis using summary measures. Stat Med. 2000 Mar 30;19(6):861-77.”

“…it is 𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒈𝒆𝒏𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒍𝒍𝒚 𝒂𝒑𝒑𝒓𝒐𝒑𝒓𝒊𝒂𝒕𝒆 to determine the summary measure solely by examining either 𝙞𝙣𝙙𝙞𝙫𝙞𝙙𝙪𝙖𝙡 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙛𝙞𝙡𝙚 𝙘𝙪𝙧𝙫𝙚𝙨 or mean curves 𝙥𝙚𝙧 𝙩𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙩𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙜𝙧𝙤𝙪𝙥. Instead, it is best to study an 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗴𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗽𝘀.”

@stephensenn.bsky.social et al. Stat Med. 2000 Mar 30;19(6):861-77.

Whilst the scale and coverage of real world data is appealing, there remain problems with their use. A recent paper by Ali Abbasi, Rob Califf et al flagged some of the core issues – confounding, inadequate documentation, incomplete capture etc 3/9
www.nejm.org/doi/full/10....

There has been a lot of debate recently about the promise of real world data - the routine (observational) data collected on patients eg  treatments received, clinical outcomes etc – for estimating treatment effects. But can they deliver? 1/9
#MethodologyMonday #123

“… design more informative pilot trials, justify their decisions to funders and ethics committees, better interpret pilot trial results, and conduct more successful definitive trials.”

“Identifying the reasons for conducting pilot trials, and following the appropriate steps to determine sample sizes, might help investigators collaborate with statisticians and methodologists, …”

Determining sample size for pilot trials: a tutorial Pilot trials have a key role in preparing for definitive randomized trials, yet determining their sample size remains a common challenge. This article provides practical guidance, methods, and tools—i...

Determining sample size for pilot trials: a tutorial @bmj.com

No more endless academic paper searches! Writing a research paper used to take weeks. With tlooto AI, you can go from a rough idea to a structure draft -- in just 3 minutes.

"With [some AI bullshit] you can go from a rough idea to a structured draft — in just 3 minutes"

We're so cooked.

"[T]he scientific enterprise is now witness to widespread, organized defection from the scientific public goods game. Large swaths of players, among them many scientists, reviewers, editors and publishers, are choosing to no longer make genuine contributions to the pot."

Fantastic new paper by @reeserichardson.bsky.social et al.

An enormous amount of work showing the extent of coordinated scientific fraud and involvement of some editors.
The number of fraudulent publications grows at a rate far outpacing that of legitimate science.
www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...

“As the investigation proceeded, it became clear that 𝙖 𝙗𝙧𝙤𝙖𝙙 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙨𝙤𝙥𝙝𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙩𝙚𝙙 𝙣𝙚𝙩𝙬𝙤𝙧𝙠 of about 35 authors 𝙬𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙥𝙤𝙩𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙞𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙮 𝙘𝙤𝙡𝙡𝙪𝙙𝙞𝙣𝙜 over a very large number of journals and published papers, a fraction of which were published by Frontiers,” @retractionwatch.com

Frontiers to retract 122 articles, links thousands in other publishers’ journals to “unethical” network The publisher Frontiers has begun retracting a batch of 122 articles across five journals after an investigation found a network of authors and editors engaged in “unethical actions” such as manipu…

Frontiers to retract 122 articles, links thousands in other publishers’ journals to “unethical” network

Journals Operating Predatory Practices Are Systematically Eroding the Science Ethos: A Gate and Code Strategy to Minimise Their Operating Space and Restore Research Best Practice Scientific research seeks to extend knowledge and understanding, an activity that perhaps more than any other advances society and humanity. In essence, it is the search for truth. But, because it se....

here’s a positive suggestion for academic publishing.
Journals need to be accredited as meeting integrity standards in order to qualify for APCs
enviromicro-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10....

It seems like a lot of systematic-reviews/meta-analyses are analogous to money laundering. You run a load of studies that nobody actually reads, many of them "dirty", through some process. On the other end you get "clean" results that the ignorant or deceitful can easily communicate as "evidence".