The terms “we” and “us” refer solely to the listed contributors at dnatalus.github.io. At the moment, there is only one of “us” … “me”. Regardless, we will continue to use the terms “us” and “we” when we really should be saying “me” and “I”. Hopefully one day there will be an “us”, at which point we can just delete this paragraph instead of needing to edit the entire disclaimer.
“You” refers to anyone not included in “us”.
Both UK and US English will be used, even in the same sentence. Data on mums could be analyzed. Maps of neigborhoods might use a particular colour scheme.
No harm intended – We will never publish anything that is intended to cause harm or distress. Given that most of what we publish will be focused on the practice of statistics and epidemiology, we don’t expect this to be a problem. That said, if you do find yourself offended by something we said, please accept our sincerest appologies.
Opinions are our own and in no way reflect the views of employers, funders, coauthors, students, or collaborators. Further, our opinions are just that, opinions. They may be more eduated than your opinions, but under no circumstances should you misconstrue our opinions as fact or professional/expert advice. If anything, this venue is a celebration of our collective ignorance, so you and you alone are reponsible for what you do with the content published at dantalus.github.io.
Mistakes happen – Accuracy and the “truth” are important to us. If you spot an error, ommision, misattribution, or complete failure to give credit where credit is due, please let us know. Please try to evidence your claim, as our current “workload model” doesn’t leave much time for wild goose-chases. We will not neccessarily point out any flaws once corrected – we have parents for that. Even though we are now 40 years old.
Providing good scientic evidence means giving a complete and unbiased accounting of existing scientific knowledge. Unfortuately, due to the afrementioned problems with our “workload model” (not to mention the challenges associated with “getting promoted” which strangely doesn’t seem to benefit from blogosphere activity) we don’t have time to complete a Cochrane Review everytime we touch on a topic. That said we will try to focus on methodological issues that sit comfortably in our wheelhouse. However, if there is something important we have missed, please feel free to let us know, or even better, leave a comment on the website.