How Do We Know What We Know?
•Transferir como PPT, PDF•
1 gostou•1,537 visualizações
My keynote at the University of Texas-Pan American PACE Ethics Conference, April 5, 2013
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (20)
Destaque
Destaque (20)
Semelhante a How Do We Know What We Know?
Semelhante a How Do We Know What We Know? (20)
Mais de Ivan Oransky
Mais de Ivan Oransky (20)
Último
Último (20)
How Do We Know What We Know?
- 1. How Do We Know What We Know? UTPA Bioethics: Creating and Challenging Knowledge in Health Edinburg, Texas, April 2013 Ivan Oransky, MD Executive Editor, Reuters Health Co-Founder, Retraction Watch @ivanoransky
- 2. Retractions on the Rise -The Wall Street Journal
- 3. How Often Are Studies Wrong?
- 4. “Winner Takes All” Incentives Scientific American, August 2012
- 5. “Winner Takes All” Incentives “The winner-take-all aspect of the priority rule has its drawbacks, however. It can encourage secrecy, sloppy practices, dishonesty and an excessive emphasis on surrogate measures of scientific quality, such as publication in high- impact journals.” -- Fang and Casadevall, Scientific American
- 6. Anonymous Whistleblowers Step Up http://www.labtimes.org
- 7. Blogs Get Aggressive http://abnormalscienceblog.wordpress.com/
- 9. Blogs Get Aggressive http://md-anderson-cc.blogspot.com
- 10. Blogs Get Aggressive http://www.science-fraud.org/
- 12. Retraction Watch
- 13. Post-Publication Peer Review Nature (22 Dec 2011) doi:10.1038/480449a
- 14. Post-Publication Peer Review http://crossref.org/
- 16. Post-Publication Peer Review http://precedings.nature.com/
- 18. Alt Metrics http://total-impact.org/
- 19. Alt Metrics http://sciencecard.org/
- 20. How Often Are Medical Studies Wrong? Ioannidis JPA. PLoS Med 2005; 2(8): e124
- 21. How Often Are Medical Studies Wrong?
- 22. Does The Literature Reflect Reality?
- 23. Does The Literature Reflect Reality? Publish a trial that will bring US$100,000 of profit or meet the end-of-year budget by firing an editor. -- Former BMJ editor Richard Smith
- 25. Positive Publication Bias “The overall frequency of positive supports has grown by over 22% between 1990 and 2007, with significant differences between disciplines and countries.” “…the strongest increase in positive results was observed in disciplines—like Clinical Medicine, Pharmacology & Toxicology, Molecular Biology” Fanelli, Scientometrics 2012.
- 27. Publish All Data? www.AllTrials.net
- 29. FDA: “Black-or-White Approval” “…abandon the current black-or-white approval process in favor of an incremental, conditional one. In such a process, drugs could be provisionally approved after promising early-stage data, with the FDA retaining the option to revoke that approval later on, should unexpected data come to light.” “A ‘conditional approval’ approach would grant limited marketing authorization to new drugs after successful Phase II trials.” http://www.manhattan-institute.org/
- 30. Confirmation Biases “Facts do not accumulate on the blank slates of researchers' minds and data simply do not speak for themselves. Good science inevitably embodies a tension between the empiricism of concrete data and the rationalism of deeply held convictions.” “…awareness of the systematic errors that can occur in evaluative processes may facilitate the self regulating forces of science and help produce reliable knowledge sooner rather than later.” -- Kaptchuk, BMJ, 2003;326:1453–5
- 31. Believers vs. Snails -- Kaptchuk, BMJ, 2003;326:1453–5
- 32. Contact/Acknowledgements ivan-oransky@erols.com http://retractionwatch.com @ivanoransky Thanks to Nancy Lapid, Reuters Health