News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on 'Serious errors' in research linking deaths to red meat. Parent comment

Re:'Serious errors' in research linking deaths to red meat by Enginerrrd on Monday September 05, 2022 @12:15PM (#32725975)
Peronsally, IMO: you should submit methodology--including the data analysis and statistical tests you'll perform, to a journal before the study has been conducted. Then, they say yes or no and if yes you perform the study and as long as it is performed to the approved specifications, you get published.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:'Serious errors' in research linking deaths to red meat by evandijk70 on Tuesday September 06, 2022 @05:46AM (#32734911)
It sounds nice, but this will make for very boring journals with 90% negative results due to problems with the methodology.

Here an example of a typical project, where researchers are interested in the role of gene X in blood vessel formation in cancer, which could make it a good target for a cancer treatment. They want to knock the gene out and measure the blood vessel formation in an in vitro model.

Publication 1.

- We attempted to knock this gene out in this cell line, but due to an infection the cell line died. The installation was sterilized, the stored master cell bank was unfrozen, and we updated our sterilization protocols.

Publication 2.

- We attempted to knock this gene out in this cell line, but sequencing showed that there were off-target effects introduced. Reagents should be changed to be more specific.

Publication 3.

- The gene was succesfully knocked, but we found that a homologous gene appeared to activate the same pathway. The homologous gene should be knocked out as well to study the function of the gene.

Publication 4.

- The gene was successfully knocked out by disabling the gene and its homologue. The assay we used to study blood vessel formation was flawed. Due to insufficient oxygen supply, the positive and negative controls for blood vessel formation did not grow. New experiments should increase oxygen flow.

Publication 5.

- We successfully studied the function of the gene and found that it does not impact blood vessel formation in cell line x.

This is how the majority of research projects end up.

However, other researchers will be looking for a biological target to treat cancer X, and the information obtained by this series of experiments is not interesting. This is just one out of 99% of 30,000 genes that are not suitable treatment targets.

The conclusions are only interesting for researchers focused on gene x (and maybe its homologue), and potentially for researchers developing methodology. Questions answered were different than the original ones posed.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:'Serious errors' in research linking deaths to red meat by latchkey on Monday September 05, 2022 @12:40PM (#32726269)
Wouldn't that just put the journals in control of what studies get performed (as well as what gets published)? Seems weird to give all that power to the journals.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:'Serious errors' in research linking deaths to red meat by marcosdumay on Monday September 05, 2022 @01:21PM (#32726740)
Well, they are already in control of what studies get published, what isn't much different.

I do think they shouldn't control that, but it's a deeper change, for a different gain.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:'Serious errors' in research linking deaths to red meat by latchkey on Monday September 05, 2022 @01:25PM (#32726778)
It is a lot different because if the study isn't published in one journal, it could always be published in another. In this situation, the study wouldn't be done at all until a journal agreed to publish it.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:'Serious errors' in research linking deaths to red meat by hiptobecubic on Monday September 05, 2022 @02:02PM (#32727194)
You could submit your proposal to other journals as well though
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:'Serious errors' in research linking deaths to red meat by latchkey on Monday September 05, 2022 @02:17PM (#32727400)
If I was a journal, and I was promising to publish a study once it is completed, I'd ask for exclusivity rights.

Which goes to show the whole issue with this idea.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:'Serious errors' in research linking deaths to red meat by marcosdumay on Monday September 05, 2022 @03:26PM (#32728260)
Again that didn't change anything when compared to the current situation.

Journals do ask for exclusivity when they publish things. The don't ask for it just for submission. And the same reasons for why they don't now (nobody would submit anything to them) apply for the OP's idea.

In fact, all the changes only make the life of the researcher easier, because he would only have to present a proposal for the journals to deny. Now he has to complete his research before he gets the denial. (It also makes the life of the journals much harder, for the same reason.)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:'Serious errors' in research linking deaths to red meat by latchkey on Monday September 05, 2022 @06:38PM (#32730328)
> Again that didn't change anything when compared to the current situation. Journals do ask for exclusivity when they publish things. The don't ask for it just for submission.

You contradict yourself. It absolutely changes things.

> Now he has to complete his research before he gets the denial.

It could degrade the incentive for the researcher to do great work, if they knew that they would be published.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:'Serious errors' in research linking deaths to red meat by watwut on Monday September 05, 2022 @02:40PM (#32727665)
There are already pre-print servers where you can pre-register your studies. It is not mandatory, but it is a think.
[ Parent | on HN ]