This feels to me a bit like the NRA's argument that the solution to school shootings is more guns in school. We're not going to fix the problems with scientific publishing by doubling down on the current system and pouring even more resources into it. We need to try something new.

My point 1 could "just" have been about cloning 101 patients to get statistical significance. But the WBC stuff makes me think the entire dataset is fake.

That looks *very* dodgy...

No official protocol for me, but if it's going to work you should be seeing significant changes within 3 sessions, & only using if you genuinely tried conservative & it's not worked

NB radial & focused shockwave quite different

Evidence seems to be there, only if conservative truly failed - means >3months of appropriate loading & addressing all contributing factors
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39572278/
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38738305/
Not first line care for sure

I am absolutely stealing that line.
Still chuckling now minutes later....

If anyone from PEDRO and/or DiTA is on here, can you have a look and let me know

I said pressure pain thresholds were a bust - statistically we had an increase at the site of pain (not at Tib ant on the same leg or the lateral elbow) but I think this effect is pretty small when you look at the raw data, & maybe down to this group starting a wee bit lower

Such an indictment that many (maybe most) of us are given no real training or even much direction in peer review.

Here's my tips on replying to reviewers comments & doing a review:
youtu.be/6YSHRhe5iQA?...
Fair warning: I also don't know what I'm doing

The Tawny Frogmouths that lived in our paperback trees on the Central cost of NSW were pretty good at hiding too

Note the large variability in response though across all the domains in this experimentally induced muscle strain model. Real-world muscle injury study on the way, should be recruiting in the coming months & will determine if there is an appreciable difference between hot, cold, and thermo-neutral