News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on We have an epidemic of deeply flawed meta-analyses, says John Ioannidis. Parent comment

Re:We have an epidemic of deeply flawed meta-analyses, says ... by Twisell on Tuesday September 20, 2016 @03:01AM (#12537690)
Though critical reading of raw data can reveal fake entry, witch is equally interesting.

I agree that replication will always be better and should ideally be mandatory. But meta-review is still way better than nothing.

And sometimes you just can't replicate for various reasons.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We have an epidemic of deeply flawed meta-analyses, says ... by dangerlibrary on Tuesday September 20, 2016 @10:10AM (#12539594)
I don't think it's obvious that meta-review is better than nothing. It can lend credence to incorrect/fraudulent results, making actual replication appear less important.
[ Parent | on HN ]