This is really fascinating and in-depth work, and seems very valuable. You might want to consider working for GiveWell or Open Phil given your skillset and clear passion for this topic!
I did want to comment about one particular item you mentioned. You said:
This looks like you are probably right—I’m really sorry I haven’t had time to go through both sets of calculations in detail but they do seem to be getting at the same sort of adjustment so that’s an excellent spot. I suppose regardless, if it isn’t obvious to a user that the same adjustment is being made to two different numbers then this is reason enough to make it more explicit!
This is really fascinating and in-depth work, and seems very valuable. You might want to consider working for GiveWell or Open Phil given your skillset and clear passion for this topic!
I did want to comment about one particular item you mentioned. You said:
I think this is not actually correct? Deworming charities have a “replicability adjustment for deworming” applied to the cost-effectiveness number (see e.g. line 11 of the Deworm the World sheet), which is arrived at via a similar kind of Bayesian framework.
This looks like you are probably right—I’m really sorry I haven’t had time to go through both sets of calculations in detail but they do seem to be getting at the same sort of adjustment so that’s an excellent spot. I suppose regardless, if it isn’t obvious to a user that the same adjustment is being made to two different numbers then this is reason enough to make it more explicit!