CiteULike is a free online bibliography manager. Register and you can start organising your references online.
Tags

Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

by: John P. A. Ioannidis
PLoS Med, Vol. 2, No. 8. (30 August 2005), e124, doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124  Key: citeulike:309395

Formatted Citation


Show HTML

Likes (beta)

This copy of the article hasn't been liked by anyone yet.

View FullText article


Abstract

There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field. In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias. In this essay, I discuss the implications of these problems for the conduct and interpretation of research.


nicholso's tags for this article

Citations (CiTO)

No CiTO relationships defined

X There are 2 reviews Average rating 3.5

X Find related articles from these CiteULike users

X Find related articles with these CiteULike tags

X Posting History


X Export records

Privacy Statement | Terms & Conditions
CiteULike organises scholarly (or academic) papers or literature and provides bibliographic (which means it makes bibliographies) for universities and higher education establishments. It helps undergraduates and postgraduates. People studying for PhDs or in postdoctoral (postdoc) positions. The service is similar in scope to EndNote or RefWorks or any other reference manager like BibTeX, but it is a social bookmarking service for scientists and humanities researchers.