CCARF Practice Question
Correct answer: C
A: Averaging conflicting scientific results is methodologically invalid. The studies may have different populations, methodologies, or endpoints. The average has no scientific meaning and obscures the actual disagreement.
B: Recency and sample size alone do not determine reliability. The preprint has not undergone peer review, and simply picking one source discards valuable context that the advisory board needs for informed decision-making.
C: For a medical advisory board, preserving full provenance is critical. The board needs to weigh peer-review status, sample size, methodology differences, and temporal context. Annotating both sources with complete metadata enables informed human judgment on conflicting scientific evidence.
D: Excluding available evidence is unhelpful. The advisory board can make informed decisions with properly attributed conflicting data. Withholding findings because they conflict reduces the board's ability to assess the situation.