The tough part was I thought the meeting was actually very productive 😭

Screenshot of the following text: Summary Incoherent Meeting Discussion The transcript appears to be a fragmented and informal conversation between Tal and Adam, with no clear topic or decisions made. The dialogue consists of brief exchanges and incomplete thoughts, making it difficult to identify specific action items or conclusions. Without more coherent content, it's not possible to provide a meaningful summary that would be helpful to someone who missed the meeting.

AI not liking my meeting style

Phil Hartman as Bill Clinton on SNL at McDonalds eating a constituent's hamburger

And yet this was ok?

for me it’s definitely cellulitis of the lower left extremity due to cat bite, which truly did get me admitted to the ED (+inpatient) 2 years ago and made one of this season’s plot lines tough to watch!
cats rule!! usually

GitHub - asacarny/hospital-cost-reports at add-snf Code to process the CMS hospital cost reports (HCRIS) and cost report datasets - asacarny/hospital-cost-reports

Now available: my hospital cost report (HCRIS) code downloads and processes SNF cost reports, too. I've only tested it a little, so take with a grain of salt and let me know how it works for you! For now, it's a separate branch in the repository here:
github.com/asacarny/hos...

Collaborator with AI-enabled Zoom was offline yesterday so I had to take notes by hand during the project call (this is also the plot of The Pitt season 2)

Another set of endless phone menus. What if I just want to speak directly to the cat

Awesome news!! Congrats!

I'm going to lose this argument and run out of free queries in the process

I feel like I'm in one of those viral videos where it insists there are 2 r's in strawberry

ChatGPT now insisting against all reason that Anderson, Indiana was a Metropolitan Statistical Area in 2020. So far it has linked to the 2020 OMB PDF, given me a page number, and provided a text extract showing it as an MSA.

(Anderson, Indiana wasn't an MSA in 2020, all of this was hallucinated!!!)

Are you prepped with French toast ingredients?

I got almost 5 years on my iPhone 12 Mini because I was 100% sure I’d hate a full size phone and didn’t want to change.

Now have a full size phone (16) and it is much better tbh

Screenshot of e-mail from CMS saying "CMS has decided to delay the requirement to transition all research studies into the CCW VRDC indefinitely."

CMS makes it official: no plans to cancel physical Medicare and Medicaid data access, forcing everyone to use the VRDC enclave. Instead, some more paperwork to make and extend DUAs – which is way better than what they were proposing!

It's that time of year again!! Attn all NYC-area health economists, submit your papers and mark your calendars for NYC Health Econ Day 2026 on Friday, May 1 at NYU Wagner. More info here: www.stern.nyu.edu/experience-s...

Yes! I think so...

Yeah, I feel like the one sided test only makes sense in the world where you know a priori the true coefficient could not be <0. So in this case you'd have to be comfortable saying wow we must have gotten a ton of negative measurement error on beta.

Hmm, I think the idea is that if any of the b_i >>> 0 then the test could reject. But depending on the true values of the b_i it could be low-powered.

The origin of this is that we prespecified joint one-sided tests in our analysis plan. Then we went to do the analysis and learned that there is no off the shelf tool to run joint one-sided tests, nor is there a well-accepted approach to doing so. Oops!

I think it is testing against the correct alternative, but there is something arbitrary about weighting each outcome equally, and if the "correct" weighting is different then the test could be very low-powered.

I think this is exactly what @scottbarkowski.bsky.social is suggesting

I wish I had the code. But if I remember correctly, we basically did this by running a constrained regression where b1hat=b2hat=b3hat, so you just estimate a single b_hat, and we ran a one-sided test on that estimate. This is the approach with equal weighting on the 3 endpoints.

Ran into a related problem in an RCT. We had 3 coprimary endpoints and wanted to run one-sided tests (b1=b2=b3=0 vs. b1<0 b2<0 b3<0). We ended up using an approach like this one: www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

Once I can get a full keyboard of this I will consider it

👆Came here to say this👆

I'm on the #EconJobMarket! I study how policies and childhood environments shape outcomes of low-income & vulnerable kids.

In my JMP, I study the effects of allowing youth who would have aged out of foster care at 18 to stay until 21—offering support their peers not in foster care get from parents.

For sure. When we wrote the peer effects research letter, we couldn’t have a supplement so even the methods went mostly unexplained. (We cited our analysis plan which did describe them… maybe good enough but not ideal)

I wish they were more of a thing for econ papers. 600 words prob too short but 1,000 might work. Like I'm v proud of our paper on peer effects w/ @andrewolenski.bsky.social @mlbarnett.bsky.social (jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...). JHE would have been a logical target but writing costs were high.

Love them for getting a simple fact out! Or reporting a study that might otherwise get file-drawered because costs of writing up the whole thing are too high. One thing that bugged me was that JAMA series journals wouldn't accept supplements for them, but that seems to have changed.

Do you love health economics and learning about cool new research? Do you like telling other people about it? Come and be a social media editor at AJHE!! We're looking for someone to join our editorial team @ashecon.bsky.social