From 6c10e0ee461d08350f5c6a8c45ff2d0feccf5d0d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Claude Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2026 01:10:59 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Report what a study cites instead of scoring it, and fix the phone The evidence tier is 'strong' on all 204 studies, because it reaches `refs >= 4` before consulting anything else and every study carries four or five references. A constant is survivable in a data file. It was on the page: printed on all 204 cards, and drawn on study.html as a filled meter reading "Strong Evidence Base" at 80 or 90 per cent. A bar at 80 per cent implies a measurement against a maximum. There is no maximum and nothing was measured. The two signals the tier short-circuits past are not constants. Measured over the library: 61 of 204 studies cite experimental or quasi-experimental work, 7 cite a systematic review or meta-analysis. They were computed and discarded. They are in master-list.json now and reported rather than scored. The card footer carries the reference count, which is 4 or 5 and so says something, and a marker for the stronger signal. The study page states both as facts with the source count. And the sidebar has an Evidence facet filtering on them: both selected means both, not either, because a reader asking for experimental work and a review wants the studies with both. It is deep-linkable, like the other facets. evidenceTier() is untouched and still returns 'strong' for all 204. What counts as strong evidence here is an editorial judgement about the library rather than a bug to patch, and CLAUDE.md already says so; this changes what the interface shows, not the field. Three phone defects, measured at 390x844: The site had no name. The wordmark was display:none below 480px, so a phone got a blue square in the corner and nothing else. It shortens to "Dev" instead. The welcome panel filled the whole first screen: over 600px of explanation before a single study, so a visitor landed on a help panel rather than a library. Its feature grid is hidden and its description clamps to three lines below 700px. Two study cards are above the fold now, and nothing was deleted. The card footer put "Read study" and "5 sources" each across two lines. The link takes its own line below 460px. Verified headless at 1280 and 390: no page errors, no horizontal overflow, the facet returns 61 of 204 and writes ?evidence=experimental, and the word "strong" no longer appears on a study page. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01MrvR2NXsJFVRCeJZFCPuNL --- CLAUDE.md | 40 +++ about.html | 2 +- css/style.css | 62 +++- data/master-list.json | 816 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- index.html | 16 +- js/app.js | 90 ++++- scripts/build.mjs | 33 +- study.html | 2 +- 8 files changed, 833 insertions(+), 228 deletions(-) diff --git a/CLAUDE.md b/CLAUDE.md index d89f7ad..a3afe58 100644 --- a/CLAUDE.md +++ b/CLAUDE.md @@ -63,6 +63,46 @@ are to raise the threshold, weight the `hasRCT` and `hasMeta` signals that the implying a distinction the data does not carry. Picking one is the owner's call. +**What changed on 2026-09-23 is what the interface shows, not the field.** A +constant is survivable in a data file and not on a page: `strong` was printed +on all 204 cards, and `study.html` drew it as a filled meter reading "Strong +Evidence Base" at 80 or 90 per cent. A bar at 80 per cent implies a measurement +against a maximum; there is no maximum and nothing was measured. + +The two signals the tier short-circuits past are **not** constants, and they +are now computed into `master-list.json` by `evidenceSignals()` and reported +rather than scored: + +| signal | studies | +|---|---| +| cites experimental or quasi-experimental work | 61 of 204 | +| cites a systematic review or meta-analysis | 7 of 204 | + +The card footer carries the reference count (4 or 5, so it says something) and +a marker for the stronger of the two signals. The study page states both as +facts. And the sidebar has an **Evidence facet** filtering on them, with both +selected meaning *both* rather than either, because a reader asking for +experimental work and a review wants the studies carrying both. + +`evidenceTier()` is untouched and still returns `strong` for all 204. When the +editorial question is settled, that is the one function to change. + +## The interface on a phone + +Three things were measured at 390x844 on 2026-09-23 and fixed: + +- **The site had no name.** `.site-logo span:last-child { display: none }` at + 480px left a blue square in the corner and nothing else. The wordmark + shortens to "Dev" instead, which the markup carries in its own span. +- **The welcome panel filled the whole first screen.** Over 600px of + explanation before a single study, so a visitor landed on a help panel rather + than on a library. Its feature grid is hidden and its description clamps to + three lines below 700px; the panel is still dismissible and the text is still + there. Two study cards are now above the fold. +- **The card footer put "Read study" and "5 sources" each across two lines**, + because a link and three metadata items were competing for one row. The link + takes its own line below 460px. + ## Watch out for - **The sitemap uses query strings.** Every study is diff --git a/about.html b/about.html index 693585c..4d8cf54 100644 --- a/about.html +++ b/about.html @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@