Hi All,
On the DAG HW, upon further discussion, we will drop q6 (the p-value interpretation question). While the topic we were trying to address remains important, we realize that perhaps the question was not worded specifically enough for folks to understand what we were asking/trying to point out. We also recognize that this topic was not central to the materials for this session and not technically covered in this course (though hopefully covered in prior epid/biostats courses).
Thus, we will work on adding it more officially for the future and revising the question. In the meanwhile, we will drop the points from the total on this HW (so scores will be out of a total of 59, not 63). Francois will make the adjustments to the scores on the CLE over the next few days (updating the numbers, not re-returning each word doc).
For those interested in this topic, I provide you with this twitter feed:
https://twitter.com/i/moments/864222884000129025
It's a slide deck assembled by Miguel Hernan entitled "Statistical Significance must go..."
In general, I think it is good practice to always look at one's results for "clinical significance" as well as "statistical significance", acknowledging that these are separate entities.
Best wishes,
JMC