(Total Views: 495)
Posted On: 03/09/2021 12:29:26 PM
Post# of 151825
And then pretended it was management’s fault for not doing a interim at 75% when the trial fully enrolled shortly after that. And then ignored when everyone told you the 42 day data wouldn’t change anything. So maybe you just aren’t someone that should be considered an informed source of analysis, if you still claim to be long here.
INCLUDING MANAGEMENT! So why is this result THEIR fault and not the DSMC??
Apparently not!
Get used to it because that’s the reality! Nobody else could see anything under the hood, we all depended on them, and this clusterf—-k is the result! Thanks DSMC!
Quote:
The DSMC made the recommendation to proceed with no changes and everybody thought it was a lock to meet endpoints.
INCLUDING MANAGEMENT! So why is this result THEIR fault and not the DSMC??
Quote:
Should we delete all those posts too because obviously it seemed like they completely failed in their role? Even though they may not have the insights into age & critical patients imbalance, wouldn't they have done a quick PE & SE mortality calc (unadjusted) and seen that there was a potential issue with meeting stat significance?
Apparently not!
Quote:
However, it's still hard for me think the DSMC failed so miserably.”
Get used to it because that’s the reality! Nobody else could see anything under the hood, we all depended on them, and this clusterf—-k is the result! Thanks DSMC!
(1)
(0)Scroll down for more posts ▼
