Just 11% of 53 cancer research papers were reproducible

Re:Just 11% of 53 cancer research papers were reproducible by languagehacker on Thursday May 09, 2013 @08:16AM (#5679959)

What the hell? That's 5.83 papers. How do you reproduce .83 of something?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Just 11% of 53 cancer research papers were reproducible by drharris on Thursday May 09, 2013 @08:18AM (#5679967)

Um, 6 papers out of 53, significant digits give you 11%. Not that difficult.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Just 11% of 53 cancer research papers were reproducible by ndr on Thursday May 09, 2013 @08:30AM (#5680018)

I guess saying "11% of 53 papers" was cooler than saying "6 out of 53". Meh.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Just 11% of 53 cancer research papers were reproducible by drharris on Thursday May 09, 2013 @08:33AM (#5680028)

Yeah, my guess is they used that form to imply 11% of all cancer research is unreproducible. But in ironic fashion, they can't show their own data and thus we can make no broad claims about it.

[ Parent | on HN ]