Galedra
Sign in Sign up

Claim

After six months in the trial, 8.9% of the intervention group versus 3.4% of the usual-care group reached HbA1c below 7%.

Type QUANTITATIVE · truth-evaluable: yes · status at snapshot: ACTIVE · created seq 22500 · qualifiers {"location":"United States; Medicaid-insured adults with persistently elevated blood sugar.","time_range":"Six months.","denominator":"Trial intervention and usual-care groups."}

Referenced 118 times: checked 1, looked up by assistants 0, viewed 87, shared 30. A count of attention, not evidence.

Topics

Nutrition · 1efd24fe Medicine · 1efd24fe

Assessment

Supported

Score: 0.8808 under ledger-default@0.3.0 at snapshot 27745

2 of 4 review checks done · 0 counted · 2 by the author only

1 independent evidence lineage · review checks 0 of 4 · stability MEDIUM

Main unresolved issue: 2 counted evidence items have no independence review; repeats of one origin may be counted as several coverage:41b07243-95d3-8324-aede-87fa08cff8e9

Not yet independently audited.Evidence reviewed so far supports this claim, but only 0 of 4 review checks have been done.A quoted passage from nutritioninsight.com was not found on the page when Galedra fetched it.

Why?

Strongest counted support: The report gives below-7% HbA1c rates of 8.9% for intervention and 3.4% for usual care after six months. weight 2.000000 evidence

Suppressed as dependent: The quoted passage directly reports six-month below-7% HbA1c rates of 8.9% intervention versus 3.4% usual care.

Review gaps: qualifiers reviewed, opposing search done, independence reviewed, primary source reviewed

What would most change this: One independent, direct measurement that contradicts this claim would move it from Supported to Unresolved.

Hide calculation

0.8808 under ledger-default@0.3.0 at snapshot 27745 · state Supported · Review checks: 0 of 4 · stability MEDIUM · 2 sources, 1 independent lineage

Model ledger-default@0.3.0 (the default model, not the answer) · snapshot 27745 · trace sha256:714e04ee229147a71a43bd33f2824913e69ebdca95eb476ff680a8aa9939cd24

Last changed at entry seq 25984; nothing logged since has borne on this claim.

How the number was reached

Each counted link is weighed by multiplying the factors the model declares; a factor it does not declare is not shown. Every factor name below links to what that number means.

LinkWorkingWeightCounted as
bdb97a89 support relevance DIRECT 2.0 × observation MEASUREMENT 1.0 × interpretation 0 steps, 1 − 0.15 × 0 1.000000 × authenticity UNVERIFIED 1.0 × extraction UNVERIFIED 1.0 × provenance INDEPENDENT 1.0 × edition NAMED_OR_UNRELATED 1 2.000000 2.000000
c5afcd6e support relevance DIRECT 2.0 × observation DIRECT_TEXT 0.9 × interpretation 0 steps, 1 − 0.15 × 0 1.000000 × authenticity UNVERIFIED 1.0 × extraction UNVERIFIED 1.0 × provenance INDEPENDENT 1.0 × edition NAMED_OR_UNRELATED 1 1.800000 0.000000 (dependent strongest only, kept bdb97a89)

prior 0.50 → log-odds 0.000000 + 2.000000 (the counted weights) = 2.000000 → probability 0.8808

Under neighbouring settings of the same model: 0.8022 to 0.9309, a spread of 0.1287.

Half-even rounding, six places for weights and four for the probability. The same inputs under the same model reproduce this exactly; that is what the trace hash above is for. How a score is worked out explains every factor, why it is there, and what the model sets it to.

Your view

Sign in to register whether you agree or disagree. A view is yours alone and never changes the assessment.

Registered views

Nobody has registered a view yet.

Registered views are personal belief, not evidence: they never change Galedra's assessment. Affiliations are self-declared and shown only for groups of 5 or more.

Checked as part of

Statements this claim was broken out of. The claim is scored on its own; a statement's reading only counts its claims.

Evidence for

Evidence against

None.

Qualifications

None.

Suppressed as dependent

EvidenceGroupKept instead
1c10e4f1bdb97a89

Inferences

Concluded from

None.

Used as a premise in

None.

An inference is interpretation, not evidence: it never changes the assessment of its conclusion. Each premise is a claim with its own evidence.

Threads

None. Threads are for disagreements about how a determination was made — a statement whose figures are not in the passage it rests on, two sources that may share an origin. Something about the world belongs in the evidence above.

Claim edges

None. Edges are stored and displayed; v0.1 does not propagate probability across them.

Review checklist

Review checks: 0 of 4

3 checks by this claim's own author. No independent review yet. 1 OPPOSING EVIDENCE SEARCH · 1 QUALIFIER CHECK · 1 EVIDENCE VERIFICATION. A check by the person who recorded a claim does not raise its review coverage.

CheckDoneBy
qualifiers reviewedno
opposing search doneno
independence reviewedno
primary source reviewedno

Summary

Supported. The main support is: The report gives below-7% HbA1c rates of 8.9% for intervention and 3.4% for usual care after six months. 357a41a3

1 further item repeats the same origin and is not independent evidence. 1c10e4f1

A search for evidence in the opposing direction found none. 3b72b868

Review checks: 0 of 4. coverage:41b07243-95d3-8324-aede-87fa08cff8e9

Generated by stub-v0.1; every sentence cites graph ids.

Contribution history

seqeventdetail
22500APPENDED
22501ACCEPTAUTOMATIC_AFTER_VALIDATION
22516LINK_EVIDENCEby 1efd24fe (accepted)
24441TASK_RESULTby 1efd24fe (accepted)

Score trace

{
  "claim": "41b07243-95d3-8324-aede-87fa08cff8e9",
  "links": [
    {
      "link": "9a440846-1d87-8777-a7f9-7aa4bdb97a89",
      "group": null,
      "edition": "NAMED_OR_UNRELATED",
      "evidence": "4481cb6f-f595-8d31-94fe-3866357a41a3",
      "direction": "SUPPORT",
      "magnitude": "2.000000",
      "relevance": "DIRECT",
      "extraction": "UNVERIFIED",
      "provenance": "INDEPENDENT",
      "observation": "MEASUREMENT",
      "source_type": "SECONDARY_TEXT",
      "authenticity": "UNVERIFIED",
      "audit_confirmed": false,
      "effective_weight": "2.000000",
      "interpretive_steps": 0
    },
    {
      "kept": "9a440846-1d87-8777-a7f9-7aa4bdb97a89",
      "link": "9d442041-9590-88ae-a372-33d2c5afcd6e",
      "group": null,
      "reason": "dependent_strongest_only",
      "edition": "NAMED_OR_UNRELATED",
      "evidence": "2c45c83a-6177-8fd6-8054-bf261c10e4f1",
      "direction": "SUPPORT",
      "magnitude": "1.800000",
      "relevance": "DIRECT",
      "extraction": "UNVERIFIED",
      "provenance": "INDEPENDENT",
      "observation": "DIRECT_TEXT",
      "source_type": "SECONDARY_TEXT",
      "authenticity": "UNVERIFIED",
      "audit_confirmed": false,
      "effective_weight": "0.000000",
      "interpretive_steps": 0
    }
  ],
  "model": "ledger-default@0.3.0",
  "prior": "0.50",
  "variants": {
    "spread": "0.1287",
    "permissive": "0.9309",
    "conservative": "0.8022"
  },
  "code_hash": "sha256:c61a6fdf35a754a0d7e958df149036a083c0eaeb7d2d2e52704ec32b0c36def7",
  "contested": false,
  "stability": "MEDIUM",
  "claim_type": "QUANTITATIVE",
  "config_hash": "sha256:86768038080b8ab5233f1e4b7aba10af05b5bb44caa432095150b90e81209809",
  "probability": "0.8808",
  "provisional": true,
  "evidence_sum": "2.000000",
  "snapshot_seq": 25984,
  "prior_log_odds": "0.000000",
  "support_groups": 1,
  "model_dependent": false,
  "review_coverage": "0.00",
  "truth_evaluable": true,
  "assessment_state": "SUPPORTED",
  "review_checklist": {
    "qualifiers_reviewed": {
      "by": [],
      "ok": false
    },
    "opposing_search_done": {
      "by": [],
      "ok": false
    },
    "independence_reviewed": {
      "by": [],
      "ok": false
    },
    "primary_source_reviewed": {
      "by": [],
      "ok": false
    }
  },
  "contradict_groups": 0,
  "rounding_boundary": false,
  "posterior_log_odds": "2.000000",
  "not_applicable_reason": null,
  "independence_unreviewed": 2
}