https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=108.162.229.207&feedformat=atomexplain xkcd - User contributions [en]2024-03-29T07:43:17ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.30.0https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1447:_Meta-Analysis&diff=87605Talk:1447: Meta-Analysis2015-03-31T21:17:17Z<p>108.162.229.207: </p>
<hr />
<div>What is this "Medline, Embase and Cochrane" ? Thanks. Dams. {{unsigned ip|108.162.254.30}}<br />
:Databases of Medical Publications [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.30|108.162.254.30]] 08:19, 14 November 2014 (UTC)<br />
:Medline[http://www.medline.com/], Embase[http://www.elsevier.com/online-tools/embase/about] and Cochrane[http://www.cochrane.org/] are medical research databases. You can find there studies on various drug uses or treatment plans. A useful information source if you want to compare studies on use of Allopurinol for chronic gout or else. [[User:Jkotek|Jkotek]] ([[User talk:Jkotek|talk]]) 08:28, 14 November 2014 (UTC)<br />
::Seems to me that should be in the explanation, no? -- [[User:Brettpeirce|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce|talk]]) 15:03, 14 November 2014 (UTC)<br />
Would it be helpful to include a breakdown of the terms?<br />
*Meta-Analysis = "We searched M, E, & C for [keyword]"<br />
*Meta-Meta-Analysis = "We searched M, E, & C for 'We searched M, E, & C for [keyword]'"<br />
*Meta-Meta-Meta-Analysis = "We searched M, E, & C for 'We searched M, E, & C for 'We searched M, E, & C for [keyword]""<br />
[[User:Smperron|Smperron]] ([[User talk:Smperron|talk]]) 08:46, 14 November 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Your paper is rejected. //"TOO META"--[[User:Theme|Theme]] ([[User talk:Theme|talk]]) 08:49, 14 November 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
IMHO a better would be this:<br />
*Meta-Analysis = "We searched M, E, & C for [keyword] and compared results between each other"<br />
*Meta-Meta-Analysis = "We analyzed how others 'search the M, E, & C for for [keyword] and compare the results'"<br />
*Meta-Meta-Meta-Analysis = "We analyzed how other 'analyze how others search the M, E, & C for for [keyword] and compare the results'"<br />
too meta [[User:Jkotek|Jkotek]] ([[User talk:Jkotek|talk]]) 15:22, 14 November 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I don't understand this explanation! Why isn't there an "Explain Explain XKCD" site? --[[User:RenniePet|RenniePet]] ([[User talk:RenniePet|talk]]) 23:43, 15 November 2014 (UTC)<br />
:I don't understand this comment! We need a Explain XKCD comment comments section!--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.199|108.162.231.199]] 09:51, 19 November 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It seems that Randall actually enjoys rejections. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.50.139|173.245.50.139]] 03:18, 18 November 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
The term "too meta" means that something is too self referential. Not "so abstract that they can't be easily interpreted." {{unsigned ip|108.162.254.88}}<br />
:Actually, if we stick to the greek root, "meta" simply signifies "beyond", or "after". So, by adding level after level of analysis, by going beyond single studies, and single studies of single studies, it is truly becoming "too meta", too grand. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.207|108.162.229.207]] 21:17, 31 March 2015 (UTC)</div>108.162.229.207https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1447:_Meta-Analysis&diff=876041447: Meta-Analysis2015-03-31T21:08:42Z<p>108.162.229.207: /* Explanation */ Small spelling mistake related to the previous edit.</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1447<br />
| date = November 14, 2014<br />
| title = Meta-Analysis<br />
| image = meta-analysis.png<br />
| titletext = Life goal #29 is to get enough of them rejected that I can publish a comparative analysis of the rejection letters.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
In the scientific literature, meta-analyses are studies which compare multiple studies on a single topic, with the aim of giving a balanced overview of the known results. [http://www.medline.com/ Medline], [http://www.elsevier.com/online-tools/embase/about Embase] and [http://www.cochrane.org/ Cochrane] are medical research databases which give access to studies on drug effects or results of other medical procedures.<br />
<br />
This comic explores the idea of iterating the process, going from meta-analyses to meta-meta-analyses (which actually exist, though not necessarily by that name, see below) and hence to a meta-meta-meta-analysis.<br />
<br />
Of course, the title text adds another level of meta-analysis, since he wants to make a meta-analysis of rejection letters which concern his meta-meta-meta analyses.<br />
<br />
All of the cited meta-meta-analyses are real: M. Sampson (2003)<ref name="sampson">M. Sampson et al, [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00110-0 Should meta-analysts search Embase in addition to Medline?], J. Clim. Epidemiol, 2003</ref>, P. L. Royle (2005)<ref name="royle">P. L. Royle et al, [http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.2005.01645.x Sources of evidence for systematic reviews of interventions in diabetes], Diabetic Medicine, 2005</ref>, E. Lee (2011)<ref name="lee">E. J. Lee et al, [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2011.01.007 The Efficacy of Acupressure for Symptom Management: A Systematic Review], J Pain Symptom Manage, 2011</ref> and A.R. Lemeshow (2005)<ref name="lemeshow">A.R. Lemeshow et al, [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.03.004 Searching one or two databases was insufficient for meta-analysis of observational studies], J. Clim. Epidemiol, 2005</ref>.<br />
<br />
The phrase "Too meta" can be found in the comments of videos, blog posts, and other internet content which are so abstract that they can't be easily interpreted.<br />
<br />
Comic [[93: Jeremy Irons]] similarly states a slightly absurd "life goal". [[917: Hofstadter]] is "meta"-related.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Excerpt from a scientific paper.]<br />
:Many meta-analysis studies include the phrase “We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane for studies…”<br />
:This has led to meta-meta-analyses comparing meta-analysis methods. e.g. M Sampson (2003), PL Royle (2005), E Lee (2011), AR Lemeshow (2005).<br />
:We performed a meta-meta-meta-analysis of these meta-meta-analyses.<br />
:<u>Methods:</u> We searched Medline, Embase and Cochrane for the phrase “We searched Medline, Embase and Cochrane for the phrase ‘We searched Medline, Embase and<br />
<br />
:Life goal #28: get a paper rejected with the comment “Too meta”<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Science]]</div>108.162.229.207https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1447:_Meta-Analysis&diff=876031447: Meta-Analysis2015-03-31T21:07:56Z<p>108.162.229.207: /* Explanation */ Added title text explanation.</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1447<br />
| date = November 14, 2014<br />
| title = Meta-Analysis<br />
| image = meta-analysis.png<br />
| titletext = Life goal #29 is to get enough of them rejected that I can publish a comparative analysis of the rejection letters.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
In the scientific literature, meta-analyses are studies which compare multiple studies on a single topic, with the aim of giving a balanced overview of the known results. [http://www.medline.com/ Medline], [http://www.elsevier.com/online-tools/embase/about Embase] and [http://www.cochrane.org/ Cochrane] are medical research databases which give access to studies on drug effects or results of other medical procedures.<br />
<br />
This comic explores the idea of iterating the process, going from meta-analyses to meta-meta-analyses (which actually exist, though not necessarily by that name, see below) and hence to a meta-meta-meta-analysis.<br />
<br />
Of course, the title text adds another level of meta-analysis, since he wants to make a meta-analysis of rejection letters which concern his meta-meta-meta analysis.<br />
<br />
All of the cited meta-meta-analyses are real: M. Sampson (2003)<ref name="sampson">M. Sampson et al, [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00110-0 Should meta-analysts search Embase in addition to Medline?], J. Clim. Epidemiol, 2003</ref>, P. L. Royle (2005)<ref name="royle">P. L. Royle et al, [http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.2005.01645.x Sources of evidence for systematic reviews of interventions in diabetes], Diabetic Medicine, 2005</ref>, E. Lee (2011)<ref name="lee">E. J. Lee et al, [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2011.01.007 The Efficacy of Acupressure for Symptom Management: A Systematic Review], J Pain Symptom Manage, 2011</ref> and A.R. Lemeshow (2005)<ref name="lemeshow">A.R. Lemeshow et al, [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.03.004 Searching one or two databases was insufficient for meta-analysis of observational studies], J. Clim. Epidemiol, 2005</ref>.<br />
<br />
The phrase "Too meta" can be found in the comments of videos, blog posts, and other internet content which are so abstract that they can't be easily interpreted.<br />
<br />
Comic [[93: Jeremy Irons]] similarly states a slightly absurd "life goal". [[917: Hofstadter]] is "meta"-related.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Excerpt from a scientific paper.]<br />
:Many meta-analysis studies include the phrase “We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane for studies…”<br />
:This has led to meta-meta-analyses comparing meta-analysis methods. e.g. M Sampson (2003), PL Royle (2005), E Lee (2011), AR Lemeshow (2005).<br />
:We performed a meta-meta-meta-analysis of these meta-meta-analyses.<br />
:<u>Methods:</u> We searched Medline, Embase and Cochrane for the phrase “We searched Medline, Embase and Cochrane for the phrase ‘We searched Medline, Embase and<br />
<br />
:Life goal #28: get a paper rejected with the comment “Too meta”<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Science]]</div>108.162.229.207https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1326:_Sharks&diff=756771326: Sharks2014-09-11T08:54:18Z<p>108.162.229.207: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1326<br />
| date = February 5, 2014<br />
| title = Sharks<br />
| image = sharks.png<br />
| titletext = 'Now, minions, I'm off to inspect our shark cages.' 'Do you really need to inspect them this often?' 'PRISONERS MUST NEVER ESCAPE.'<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Language, spelling, I'm too tired to summarize all.}}<br />
This comic is a joke about the use of sharks in action movies. In these movies, sharks are often used to guard locations and dispense capital punishment.[http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SharkPool] Since the idea of a guard shark is not practical, this comic suggests that villains raise sharks to help with declining shark populations in the oceans.<br />
<br />
In this comic [[Cueball]] is an evil villain who rules over a "Doom Island." In addition to commanding minions and detaining prisoners, he keeps sharks to threaten prisoners. When a prisoner escapes the island, he orders his minions to "release the sharks." However, the sharks do not hunt the prisoner, but merely swim away. The comic jokes that Cueball is using fugitives as a pretense to help with declining shark populations, and that Doom Island is just a front for a marine biology center. Cueball maintains the whole "guard sharks" idea as a cover-up, so that his minions do not catch on to the real mission.<br />
<br />
The title text plays on the idea that Cueball can't be openly concerned with his sharks' welfare without his minions catching on, and claims to be inspecting the shark cages under the guise of using them to confine either prisoners or (taking advantage of his minions' apparent ignorance) the sharks themselves, despite the obvious impracticality of using a cage rather than an aquarium to house a marine animal. A {{w|shark proof cage|shark cage}} is not used to imprison sharks or anything else, but to provide protection for divers wishing to observe sharks up-close. Because a real villainous lair would have no use for shark cages, it follows that Cueball owns them solely for the purpose of gratifying his interest in his sharks, thus forcing him to keep up the pretense of the cages being of some help in preventing prisoners from escaping.<br />
<br />
The shark issue is also one of the items on the chart of [[1331: Frequency]].<br />
<br />
===Use of sharks in movies===<br />
In action movie trope from the '70s and '80s, evil villains use sharks to kill off enemies. Some examples are:<br />
*{{w|The Spy Who Loved Me (film)|The Spy Who Loved Me}}<br />
*{{w|Thunderball (film)|Thunderball}}<br />
*{{w|Despicable Me}}, where the comical villain has a shark in his lair that unrealistically acts as a guard dog.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball is sitting on a throne, talking to a minion who's not shown in the panel.]<br />
:Minion: The prisoner escaped and is swimming toward the mainland!<br />
:Cueball: ''Release the sharks.''<br />
:Minion: Yes, sir.<br />
<br />
:Minion: The sharks are swimming away.<br />
:Cueball: They're escaping, too? Send sharks after them!<br />
<br />
:Minion: Now ''those'' sharks are swimming away.<br />
:Cueball: '''''More sharks.'''''<br />
:Minion: ...Sir, what's going on?<br />
:Cueball: Prisoners, of course! Can't let 'em escape!<br />
<br />
:Minion: Sir, are you trying to turn Doom Island into a marine biology center?<br />
:Cueball: ''Shark populations are in decline–''<br />
:Cueball: *ahem*<br />
:Cueball: I mean, the world must fear us!<br />
:Minion: Right...<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Sharks]]</div>108.162.229.207