{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreibjdeu6fjhawl26ffhl57t5oeg6ge4kaag7rhrfxdrx6kqu4cvn4y",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:wwyqal4cnqhuwyacdj7rqq3n/app.bsky.feed.post/3mn6zassz2ph2"
  },
  "path": "/t/generalizability-vs-transportability-in-trials/28551?page=4#post_64",
  "publishedAt": "2026-05-31T13:28:46.000Z",
  "site": "https://discourse.datamethods.org",
  "tags": [
    "here",
    "randomized non-comparative trials (RNCTs)"
  ],
  "textContent": "Nice summary indeed but oversimplifies since many statisticians (including in the DataMethods forum) would reasonably counterargue in favor of using parametric approaches in practice while keeping the randomization framework in mind (see also discussion here).\n\nThe crystal clear telltale sign, also noted by Robert Matthews but not the blog posts, that Fisher’s framework is indeed too often misunderstood in medical RCTs is the emergence and advocacy by a surprisingly large fraction of biostatisticians of randomized non-comparative trials (RNCTs). While we can debate about the merits of pure randomization-based inference, there is no convincing excuse in favor of RNCTs.",
  "title": "Generalizability vs. Transportability in Trials"
}