Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for The restricted section

Channel

The restricted section

@quibblerary

On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

101subscribers

+22 since we began measuring on 23 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1002044060618
TypeChannel
Username@quibblerary
CreatedBetween 1 November 2023 and 31 May 2024 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded23 August 2026
Last confirmed live15 September 2026
Measurements held5
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 15 September 2026
On Telegramt.me/quibblerary

Growth

791019023 August 2026 — 79 subscribers24 August 2026 — 86 subscribers30 August 2026 — 97 subscribers8 September 2026 — 100 subscribers15 September 2026 — 101 subscribers23 August 202615 September 2026
5 measurements spanning 23 days, net +22. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 76–104 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
15 Sept 2026, 20:36101+1
8 Sept 2026, 15:00100+3
30 Aug 2026, 22:0597+11
24 Aug 2026, 16:0886+7
23 Aug 2026, 09:1579first reading

Engagement

11 posts held, back to 6 July 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 page of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
20.8%
avg views ÷ 101 subscribers
Avg views / post
21.0
1 post measured
Reaction rate
28.6%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
1
of 11 held

ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.

ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views — note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 23 August 2026
Posts held11 (6 July 202623 August 2026)
Views total21
Reactions total6
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken23 Aug 2026, 09:15 UTC

Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.

Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.

Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.

Reaction mix

55 reactions across 10 posts, in 8 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 61.8% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
3461.8%
🔥1120.0%
👀35.45%
23.64%
😁23.64%
🎉11.82%
🐳11.82%
👍11.82%

No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.

Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.

Coverage. Reactions were read on 10 of the 11 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 55 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 11 most recent posts we hold, published 6 July 2026 to 23 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Recent posts

23 Aug 2026, 09:05 UTC21 views6 reactionsread 23 August 2026
Photo

Тут примерно на 20 человек больше, чем было вчера, благодаря Григорию Алексеевичу @oncofundamental ❤️ Я представлюсь, чтобы вы сами решали - хотите оставаться или нет и кто вообще все это пишет) Меня зовут Виктория Миргородская, я онколог-химиотерапевт из города Санкт-Петербург (даже скорее Лен область по месту работы). Больше всего мне нравится описывать клинические случаи "с полей" в коротком формате и подкреплять

🔥5🎉1

19 Aug 2026, 05:54 UTC132 views7 reactionsread 23 August 2026
Photo

Попросила дипсик посчитать за сколько времени я сегодня управлюсь со всеми задачами (без сложностей вроде пересмотреть КТшки и пр.) по его мнению 😄 Я боюсь представить, что он напишет врачам из больших городских учреждений. Держитес.

4👀21

16 Aug 2026, 15:08 UTC153 views8 reactionsread 23 August 2026

У меня было такое длинное введение о том как я ужасалась новым анализам и пр. (сейчас АЛТ = 135, АСТ = 51 и это просто вау 🙂, МНО = 0,84, билирубин = 25), но пусть будет коротко - когда хотел просто покапать ниволумаб на уже достигнутый частичный ответ и все пошло не по плану. * Телеграм это сложно. https://teletype.in/@mac_mac_mas/SN9T5nalEjg

7🔥1

23 Jul 2026, 21:03 UTC149 views7 reactionsread 23 August 2026
Photo

Когда высокий прокальцитонин это не инфекция? Просто горный алмаз среди кейсов о неспецифичности провоспалительных маркеров. Ситуация объективно нехорошая для пациента, зато запоминающаяся для проведения дифференциальной диагностики. При поступлении: пациент с раком предстательной железы в анамнезе, два года получавший стандартную терапию (АДТ + апалутамид), исходно с метастатическим поражением костей, с которым ст

5🔥2

12 Jul 2026, 09:40 UTCviews —

The restricted section pinned «Длинные тексты и посты: 1) Распространенный МРЛ 2) НМРЛ I-II стадии 3) Метаанализ LACE 4) НМРЛ III стадии 5) Саркома Юинга 6) IDH-мутированный ХЦР 7) Довиль, Лугано, классификация лимфом 8) Легочная артериальная гипертензия 9) Рак прямой кишки подробно 10)…»

12 Jul 2026, 09:37 UTC152 views6 reactionsread 23 August 2026

Длинные тексты и посты: 1) Распространенный МРЛ 2) НМРЛ I-II стадии 3) Метаанализ LACE 4) НМРЛ III стадии 5) Саркома Юинга 6) IDH-мутированный ХЦР 7) Довиль, Лугано, классификация лимфом 8) Легочная артериальная гипертензия 9) Рак прямой кишки подробно 10) Поиск на пабмеде 11) Молекулярная биология глиобластом 12) Исследования на олиго рак предстательной железы 13) Панкейрас ингибиторы и дараксонрасиб 14) Псевдомембр

6

8 Jul 2026, 18:48 UTC141 views6 reactionsread 23 August 2026
Photo

... И проблема в том, что в РФ, кажется, IPC то почти не ставят... (Напишите, если ставят, сегодня узнавала, но мало ли...). У IPC есть один популярный вариант, который называется PleurX, в продаже его как будто и нет. И, соответственно, остается вариант с плевродезом (очень даже competitive альтернатива) или оставлять обычный дренаж short-moderate стояния вроде плеврокана, предназначенный на несколько дней - на неск

3🔥21

8 Jul 2026, 18:48 UTC104 views5 reactionsread 23 August 2026
Photo

Была у нас запланирована благородная цель - у пациентки с платинорезистентным раком яичников с рецидивирующим гидротораксом и асцитом поставить плевральный дренаж на пару-тройку недель и попробовать добиться спонтанного плевродеза. После запланированного удаления дренажа из брюшной полости пациентка возвращается на отделение без обоих дренажей, т.е. в т.ч. и без плеврального после его стояния в течение недели. За су

3👀1🔥1

7 Jul 2026, 15:17 UTC83 views3 reactionsread 23 August 2026
Photo

Обожаю эту пафосную индийскую рассылку новостей. Каждый вторник жутко веселюсь. А на сайте обычно ещё есть загадки. Можно заказать себе на почту тут.

😁2🐳1

6 Jul 2026, 20:14 UTC78 views6 reactionsread 23 August 2026
Photo

1, 2. Всякие оценки исследований 2025-года. На второй картинке GPT и Gemini не одобряют Matterhorn, показалось интересным (но возможно эта картинка сделана чисто ради просмотров, совсем не исключаю). 3. Последовательность лечения HR+ РМЖ по мутациям. 4. Схема лечения рака мочевого пузыря в идеальном мире. 5. Кислотно-щелочные нарушения. 6. Очень !! крутая инфографика по шкалам оценки патоморфоза среди разных опухолей

6

Showing the 11 most recent of 11 posts we hold for @quibblerary. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.

Mentions

Named by 1 registered channel — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.

Named by

Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.

Names

Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.

A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.

Cite this entry

A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 15 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“The restricted section” (@quibblerary), 101 subscribers as measured 15 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/quibblerary.

Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.