Yep, agree that this is similar to feedback loops, but I feel like people talking about feedback loops are more focused on the timescales for evaluation, rather than on timescale and quality and cost.
Would be interesting to see work looking at how precisely we should make trade offs between expected value, quality of evidence and potential for ongoing evaluation.
I think it might make sense to divide quality of evidence into quality of existing evidence and potential for ongoing evaluation.
Yep, agree that this is similar to feedback loops, but I feel like people talking about feedback loops are more focused on the timescales for evaluation, rather than on timescale and quality and cost.
Would be interesting to see work looking at how precisely we should make trade offs between expected value, quality of evidence and potential for ongoing evaluation.
I think it might make sense to divide quality of evidence into quality of existing evidence and potential for ongoing evaluation.