I pretty much do this, but I also read the "Methods" section after the conclusion. You'd be surprised how quickly you can filter out a paper based on how they actually collected the data.
It's not uncommon for papers to use crappy methods at either sampling, or they use an unreliable method for measuring the key data point. Or they use the right method, but you can see they made a mistake in the process.
At least in my field (biochemistry) I'd always look at the methods as a hard filter.
It's not uncommon for papers to use crappy methods at either sampling, or they use an unreliable method for measuring the key data point. Or they use the right method, but you can see they made a mistake in the process.
At least in my field (biochemistry) I'd always look at the methods as a hard filter.