A new imaging method follows activity across transparent fish. The promise is a richer view of physiology; the challenge is proving which connections cause what.
Study published 9 Sep 2026.
A September review asks who produces the evidence behind digital health tools. For readers, the practical task is to inspect both the result and the route that produced it.
A new study follows research published after the original trial report. It raises a useful distinction: more papers, new investigators and new participants are three different things.
An experiment with medical students separates a convincing explanation from evidence that the answer is right.
A randomized study tested the missing link between an AI answer and a person’s decision. Strong model scores did not translate into better choices.
A benchmark experiment shows why a picture-plus-text score needs a closer look at the words beside the image.
Learn to separate adverse events from adverse reactions, count people rather than episodes and interpret zero events without claiming zero risk.
The COMPare project followed trial publications back to their plans. Use its findings to inspect an outcome change without jumping to accusations.
A combined outcome can tell a useful story while leaving its most important chapter unresolved. Work through a first-event example and learn what to look for in the component results.
Find the missing denominator, connect results and ask better questions. Our evidence toolkit gives you a place to start.
Open the evidence toolkitOne question. A connected reading path. Institutional announcements and earlier coverage, preserved at their original addresses. The collection begins in 2010.
Browse the press release archive