Meta-research and other stories . . .
BMJ 2015; 351 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h5641 (Published 28 October 2015) Cite this as: BMJ 2015;351:h5641
Critic and sage
“Why Most Published Research Findings Are False” was the 2005 paper that propelled John Ioannidis to fame, and he remains one of the most cogent critics of the published literature. This month he used his opening address at the annual Cochrane Colloquium in Vienna to argue that most systematic reviews are pointless. But his positive contributions are equally remarkable, and anyone interested in how medical knowledge is generated needs to read his latest paper (PLoS Biol 2015;13:e1002264; doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002264). It is about meta-research, which means how to do, report, verify, correct, and reward science.
The heart of prognosis
The hormones that the heart releases under stress are powerful prognostic markers, and a study by oncologists in Vienna finds that this applies not just to …
Log in
Log in using your username and password
Log in through your institution
Subscribe from £184 *
Subscribe and get access to all BMJ articles, and much more.
* For online subscription
Access this article for 1 day for:
£50 / $60/ €56 (excludes VAT)
You can download a PDF version for your personal record.