this post was submitted on 21 May 2025
571 points (97.7% liked)

science

18664 readers
436 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
m3t00@lemmy.world
Joleee@lemmy.world
laverabe@lemmy.world
DeadPand@midwest.social
laverabe@lemmy.zip
571
Is red meat bad for health? Meta-study of 44 studies finds results depend on the sponsor. If the sponsor is impartial, studies find it's bad. Studies sponsored by the meat industry find the opposite (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by dwazou@lemm.ee to c/science@lemmy.world
105 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 4 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

A study of studies? That's interesting. I wonder how often that happens? I should do a study about it. A study of studies about studies.

[–] paris@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

A review of studies is a meta-analysis. What you're describing is a meta-meta-analysis, which is also a thing! Here's one I found from a cursory search..

[–] milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 4 points 16 hours ago

Alt text: Life goal #29 is to get enough of them rejected that I can publish a comparative analysis of the rejection letters.