The article discusses the challenges and consequences of addressing errors in scientific studies, particularly emphasizing a case involving a diabetic support tool. Scientists and editors often resist requests for transparency regarding flawed research, citing patient consent and data protection laws. However, the prevalence of statistical errors in scientific studies is alarming, with significant portions being incorrectly analyzed, which can lead to misguided medical practices. The piece highlights the slow process of scientific self-correction and the potential harm done to society by these errors, showcasing the urgent need for accountability and better practices in research publishing.
"As noted by Retraction Watch, in an earlier e-mail to us, the corresponding author of the paper said, 'sharing data with a third party would breach the study participants' consent and European rules on data protection.' But such errors would invalidate preliminary positive results for a Web-based clinical decision support tool intended to help diabetes patients."
"That’s what we were concerned about. Unfortunately, such irresponsibility is all too common. Science informs our medical care, flies us through the skies, and keeps us safe while driving."
"When mistakes happen, the costs can be high. Researchers say that science is self-correcting, but often it isn't or it is unforgivably slow. For example, in the early 19th century, based on obviously bad sampling, physicians misdiagnosed many healthy infants..."
Collection
[
|
...
]