Suppr超能文献

作为研究侦探的读者。

Readers as research detectives.

作者信息

Gøtzsche Peter C

机构信息

The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Dept 3343, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.

出版信息

Trials. 2009 Jan 7;10:2. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-10-2.

Abstract

Flaws in research papers are common but it may require arduous detective work to unravel them. Checklists are helpful, but many inconsistencies will only be revealed through repeated cross-checks of every little detail, just like in a crime case. As a major deterrent for dishonesty, raw data from all trials should be posted on a public website. This would also make it much easier to detect errors and flaws in publications, and it would allow many research projects to be performed without collecting new data. The prevailing culture of secrecy and ownership to data is not in the best interests of patients.

摘要

研究论文中的缺陷很常见,但要发现这些缺陷可能需要艰苦的调查工作。核对清单很有帮助,但许多不一致之处只有通过对每个细节进行反复核对才能发现,就像在犯罪案件中一样。作为对不诚实行为的主要威慑手段,所有试验的原始数据都应发布在公共网站上。这也将使发现出版物中的错误和缺陷变得容易得多,并且将允许许多研究项目在不收集新数据的情况下进行。目前盛行的数据保密和所有权文化不符合患者的最佳利益。

相似文献

1
Readers as research detectives.
Trials. 2009 Jan 7;10:2. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-10-2.
2
No short-cut in assessing trial quality: a case study.
Trials. 2009 Jan 7;10:1. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-10-1.
3
How a data detective exposed suspicious medical trials.
Nature. 2019 Jul;571(7766):462-464. doi: 10.1038/d41586-019-02241-z.
4
[What can we learn from the Scott Reuben case? Scientific misconduct in anaesthesiology].
Anaesthesist. 2009 Dec;58(12):1199-209. doi: 10.1007/s00101-009-1637-6.
5
Enhancing reproducibility: Failures from Reproducibility Initiatives underline core challenges.
Biochem Pharmacol. 2017 Aug 15;138:7-18. doi: 10.1016/j.bcp.2017.04.008. Epub 2017 Apr 8.
6
Toward Fairness in Data Sharing.
N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 4;375(5):405-7. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1605654.
9
Policy: NIH plans to enhance reproducibility.
Nature. 2014 Jan 30;505(7485):612-3. doi: 10.1038/505612a.

本文引用的文献

1
No short-cut in assessing trial quality: a case study.
Trials. 2009 Jan 7;10:1. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-10-1.
2
Believability of relative risks and odds ratios in abstracts: cross sectional study.
BMJ. 2006 Jul 29;333(7561):231-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38895.410451.79. Epub 2006 Jul 19.
5
Bias in double-blind trials.
Dan Med Bull. 1990 Aug;37(4):329-36.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验