Talk:Nurses' Health Study

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AddisonBlacksmith.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:29, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Summary of results; links to other mass studies[edit]

Would be nice to have in the article. And some links to other mass heath studies such as the Framingham heart study (sp?). 80.2.192.24 (talk) 00:01, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons for NOT doing longitudinal studies are numerous: cost, difficulty finding sponsorship, potential conflict of interest in sponsorship, etc. MaynardClark (talk) 17:16, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism Section[edit]

This study has come under recent criticism by other large scale epidemiological studies, which should be noted. 68.232.186.147 (talk) 13:42, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any links or Pubmed IDs? NW (Talk) 15:47, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the epic hormone therapy disaster comes to mind as being one of the spawn of the Nurses' Health Study. I have to say, it's a little baffling to see a booster list of 4 major results with no mention of that. --Gwern (contribs) 17:20 10 January 2015 (GMT)