FADE IN.
Act 1
INT. STUDY - DAY
PETER checks phone notifications.
PETER (V.O.): Are asymptomatic carriers of CONVID-19 not contagious?
Recalling.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): An expert has recently warned that people in Hong Kong shouldn't be complacent, as one super spreader can turn Hong Kong upside down.
Peter surfs the web and watches a video clip.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): The World Health Organization (WHO) says it "appears to be rare" that asymptomatic carriers of CONVID-19 are contagious.
Peter watches the clip again.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): It seems that what she said was based on some uncontrolled data. Her body language suggests that she needs some endorsement.
Pausing.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): So what should be the public's level of confidence on WHO''s advice? They should be authentic.
Pausing.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): But, are asymptomatic carriers of CONVID-19 contagious not?
Pausing.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): This is a significant issue as about half of the people infected with CONVID-10 are asymptomatic.
Act 2
INT. STUDY - CONTINUOUS
Peter researches with his phone.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): For evidence-based medicine, expert opinions provide generalized information about a condition, just basic level stuff like background information. What are better ones?
Reading.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): A case-controlled observational study is one that identifies patients that have been exposed to asymptomatic carriers (case-controlled) and patients that have not (prospective cohorts), and looks for exposure of interest.
Reading.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): To test an intervention/treatment, a cohort observational study identifies two groups of patients, one which did receive the exposure of interest, and one which did not, and following these cohorts forward for the outcome of the interest.
Reading.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): Such observational studies require fewer resources but provide relatively less evidence for casual inference ie just the odds ratios rather than the relative risks.
Reading.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): Randomized controlled trials are medical experiments between a randomized group of patients in an experimental group and a control group. The two groups are treated differently. The groups are followed up for analysing the outcomes of the interest. Good blinding may reduce or eliminate some sources of experimental bias.
Pondering.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): Case-controlled study, cohort study and randomized controlled trials provide unfiltered information.
Reading.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): When authors evaluate and synopsize individual research studies, they write article synopses which are critically appraised.
Reading.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): There're other authors who evaluate and synthesize multiple research studies on the topic and develop evidence syntheses, which are critically appraised.
Reading.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): Then, other authors may systematically search for, appraise, and summarise all of the medical literature for a specific topic like CONVID-19 ie systematic reviews.
Reading.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): The article synopses, evidence syntheses and systematic reviews are filtered information.
Nodding.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): So, in 3 phases, there're 7 levels of medical confidence.
Pausing.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): Phase I is expert opinions (level 1); Phase II is unfiltered information comprising: case-controlled studies (level 2), cohort studies (level 3), and randomized controlled trials (level 4), and Phase III is filtered information comprising: article synopses (level 5), evidence syntheses (level 6) and systematic reviews (level 7).
Reflecting.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): As the levels of explanation elevate, the quality of the medical evidence also enhances.
Pausing.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): As there're just too much that we don't know, and many lives are at risk in pandemic times, such an investigative process is necessary and essential.
Pausing.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): But when compared with Nature, humankind is still silly, ineffective and inefficient.
Act 3
INT. STUDY - CONTINUOUS
On the TV screen, an ANCHOR is talking to a COMMENTATOR about asymptomatic CONVID-19 spreaders. We hear:...guideline/advice...confusing to a lot of people...need clarification...
PETER (V.O.): As a result of my research and analysis, I can reduce the objective findings to form my subjective opinion on the topic.
Thinking.
PETER (V.O.)(Cont'd): It appears that the expert opinions aren't based on unfiltered information through studies and trials, not to mention filtered information through critical appraisals.
Thinking.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'd): They're just the base level of explanation - authentic when compared to laymen's.
Thinking.
PETER (V.O.)(Cont'd): There's no evidence of successive levels of investigations and findings that scientifically explain the casual relationship between the state of affairs under study and the proposition ie whether asymptomatic carriers of CONVID-19 contagious not?
Pausing.
PETER (V.O.)(Cont'd): Without the successive levels of evidence and no synthesis, what is the probable truth is still blurry.
Pausing.
PETER (V.O.)(Cont'd): In terms of level of confidence, I believe my opinion that the conclusion on the blurry issue is moot is neither better nor worse than other experts.
Smiling.
PETER (V.O.)(Cont'd): It's pretty interesting that my deep intellectual engagement with Quorans can be as timely as the news.
Pausing.
PETER (V.O.) (Cont'): It's great that I can help explain some current worldly phenomenon. Let me also share my opinion in the Quora platform then.
Peter types on his phone.
FADE OUT.
THE END

コメント