Read on Twitter
I decided to start a partial catalogue of threads on teacher risk.
Here’s the Office for Statistics Regulation letter upholding my complaint about an ONS ad hoc study on teacher risk—a study that got cited so many times, my non-UK followers might even have heard of it. 1/ https://twitter.com/sarahdrasmussen/status/1352691034090852352
Here’s the Office for Statistics Regulation letter upholding my complaint about an ONS ad hoc study on teacher risk—a study that got cited so many times, my non-UK followers might even have heard of it. 1/ https://twitter.com/sarahdrasmussen/status/1352691034090852352
Here is a summary thread about issues with this ONS ad hoc study. 2/ https://twitter.com/sarahdrasmussen/status/1346200721398632449
And here is a longer and more detailed thread on the topic. 3/ https://twitter.com/SarahDRasmussen/status/1343639137287593988
In January I wrote a thread on the January ONS report on Covid deaths by occupation. Much of the media and government attention this ONS report received were in reference to results for certain education-related staff. 4/ https://twitter.com/sarahdrasmussen/status/1355289798622253065
In December the ONS published an excellent report on a schools survey conducted in collaboration with PHE and the LSHTM.
Unfortunately the PHE Press Office mischaracterised this report in a press release, which led to inaccurate and misleading media coverage. 5/ https://twitter.com/sarahdrasmussen/status/1339741021215854594
Unfortunately the PHE Press Office mischaracterised this report in a press release, which led to inaccurate and misleading media coverage. 5/ https://twitter.com/sarahdrasmussen/status/1339741021215854594
December also brought a Public Health Scotland teacher risk study.
Its main report omitted their elevated school reopening confirmed case hazard ratios for teachers (found in a sep appendix). They hinted at the results, then made invalid arguments to try to explain them away. 6/ https://twitter.com/sarahdrasmussen/status/1346200726343737345
Its main report omitted their elevated school reopening confirmed case hazard ratios for teachers (found in a sep appendix). They hinted at the results, then made invalid arguments to try to explain them away. 6/ https://twitter.com/sarahdrasmussen/status/1346200726343737345
I sent the authors and Office for Statistics Regulation a detailed email about the PHS study, and particularly raised concerns about their testing related claims, which I felt were unsupported by the limited data they had included.
Here’s a thread on their updated preprint. 7/ https://twitter.com/sarahdrasmussen/status/1359599386922258439
Here’s a thread on their updated preprint. 7/ https://twitter.com/sarahdrasmussen/status/1359599386922258439