Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to Thread
Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the
Diabetes Forum Survey 2025 »
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Type 1 Diabetes
Addicted to data?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="KennyA" data-source="post: 2576539" data-attributes="member: 517579"><p>Interesting question. I worked for years somewhere that had all the data you could possibly want on just about everything, but had actually very little information, because very few people actually bothered analysing it. For example we used to report performance in a particular sector as an "average" (mean) of all the individual units, and this came out (iirc) at about 68%. However once you picked it apart, it became clear that most units were scoring in the 90%s (the median was 93) but we had a troublesome group in the 20s and 30s, with nothing in between. Nobody actually scored 68% and treating the high and low groups as if they did meant we got it wrong consistently. It was because that was how the spreadsheet had been set up originally, and it had never been questioned.</p><p></p><p>It's achieving understanding that's crucial, and actively using data to drive the understanding. That should give you useful information.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="KennyA, post: 2576539, member: 517579"] Interesting question. I worked for years somewhere that had all the data you could possibly want on just about everything, but had actually very little information, because very few people actually bothered analysing it. For example we used to report performance in a particular sector as an "average" (mean) of all the individual units, and this came out (iirc) at about 68%. However once you picked it apart, it became clear that most units were scoring in the 90%s (the median was 93) but we had a troublesome group in the 20s and 30s, with nothing in between. Nobody actually scored 68% and treating the high and low groups as if they did meant we got it wrong consistently. It was because that was how the spreadsheet had been set up originally, and it had never been questioned. It's achieving understanding that's crucial, and actively using data to drive the understanding. That should give you useful information. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Type 1 Diabetes
Addicted to data?
Top
Bottom
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Ad free.
Join the community »
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn More.…