Mentions
Extended reach
Total likes
Video views
AI synopsis
Discussions demonstrate strong agreement with the article, as seen in comments referencing notable researchers like Ioannidis and Begley, and concern about research sloppiness, with words like 'crisis' and 'irreproducibility' emphasizing significance. The tone combines critical analysis with recognition of systemic issues, reflecting deep engagement and perceived impact on scientific practices.
Most discussions acknowledge the reproducibility crisis and the importance of the article, showing general support for addressing scientific reliability.
Participants are highly engaged, referencing multiple studies, experts, and debates about research practices.
Several contributors critically analyze research quality, quoting specific studies and authors, indicating meaningful engagement.
The conversations highlight the potential influence of the article on scientific standards and public trust, with mentions of widespread issues and reforms.
La investigación es una actividad humana que no ocurre en el vacío. Por ello es importante analizar el contexto en el que se desarrolla: si es uno que incentiva prácticas cuestionables, lo normal es que así las obtengamos https://t.co/xqpOEeGNoW https://t.co/WYiuagjAjp
@KenSycspng @LordPerkins @buddha3321 @StephenNRA2 @KVandetti Like Dr's: Ryan Cole Robert Malone Peter McCullough Paul Marik Pierre Kory etc etc etc AND Is this the data you claim to be reviewing? 'Irreproducibility based on these empirical observations range from 75% to 90%' Irreproducibility = is this info correct? https://t.co/OlPMXKXGuE
@immunotoxPhD @Boxmenot @BeckyJohnson222 @lex6m @doritmi @ladybugobgyn @Plasticdoe @Raelove65451372 @CoercedTaxSlave @bruce_barrett @RogueTrader84 @GansenJared @KrochetxKorner @TYLERG927 @Anguish4ever @PileOfGoop @MsTrixter @VeritasEver @mcfunny @Siubhan_H @bobsnee @kmerian @ianfmusgrave @StopVaxxedLies @Sohnhicc @EmmaGPaley @45HammerTime @Nukem37 @amanda_pompili @t3tragrammat0n @kidoctr @TeddyFreddy11 @erikwilson1975 @Notyour28981739 @jjay_1984 @Stephaniethe2nd @BigTheyInc @Golfergirl2018 @DCataneo @SkepticalMutant @MAhealthforkids @JulieAMcLean @weaponizedword1 @kuriousmind93 @milnem @begarcia87 @laurast30381821 @Just4TheCause @michabird67 @KittyAmnezia 'concerns have been expressed for observational research where zero of 52 predictions from observational studies were confirmed in randomized clinical trials'. https://t.co/lAPL1akLKW
@tandfonline Thanks. Also, it's well known that the experimental unit, measure or other defined term for unit of analysis is often incorrectly identified, translating to incorrect analytics. https://t.co/mC2ue7KXHj https://t.co/QUegZul9bi https://t.co/IcHW5Ldvzj https://t.co/XGG5KMu7gX
@BerryTartlet @TheChiefNerd @P_McCulloughMD Plus there is a crisis of sloppiness in peer reviewed research. https://t.co/pwj60NQHDc
@YannBECKER4 @ThomasMoore112 @podz4 @gcomeaudotcom @jeanbarbeau2 @SebMarinMD Pêle-mêle. https://t.co/bEk67tdKSx https://t.co/EOICFW0PZy https://t.co/W0mKIOwA4b https://t.co/gRREvXRdXw https://t.co/WpwyWzuMKW https://t.co/Nb6MItzOuz https://t.co/cwpLaeyg8c https://t.co/kwWfkLCSjw
Scientific progress relies on reliable, reproducible data. This video discusses the growing reproducibility crisis in biomedical research, caused by poor practices and publish-or-perish culture, emphasizing the need for…
In her public lecture, physicist Catherine Beauchemin explores how contemporary examples like COVID-19 and influenza highlight issues of scientific reproducibility and public trust, emphasizing the importance of…
@brianartese @simonmaechling https://t.co/2THCx0dLY2
@kevinnbass Very important to put this research in context, which the poster fails to do. There is no 28 billion of taxpayer waste proven anywhere. See quote and citation below from Begley, et al https://t.co/ihEXsxp7Hh https://t.co/PablJeaEP2
@pmarca John Ioannidis had something to say about this a while back https://t.co/U7sAvhIAxy
@Eudaimon_Sporos @FtimaMonterros3 @AKN4710 Nunca lo fue, verdad? Ten una muestra de la realidad del mundo de las publicaciones "cientificas" y sus conclusiones cientificas. https://t.co/ZRnLKlrnlp https://t.co/BoLhGvhKA9 https://t.co/Y0maJbNXtt https://t.co/ELMKmzqrdW
@YannBECKER4 @ThomasMoore112 @podz4 @gcomeaudotcom @jeanbarbeau2 @SebMarinMD Pêle-mêle. https://t.co/bEk67tdKSx https://t.co/EOICFW0PZy https://t.co/W0mKIOwA4b https://t.co/gRREvXRdXw https://t.co/WpwyWzuMKW https://t.co/Nb6MItzOuz https://t.co/cwpLaeyg8c https://t.co/kwWfkLCSjw
@ReginaJ50039402 @iusethisonline @LeorSapir @TM0s41 @profjmb @MattiasDeSmet Did you read the article by Ioannidis? "[I]t is important to note at the outset that these concerns about the irreproducibility of science do not invalidate the validity or legitimacy of the scientific method." https://t.co/wq3027A6xV
@BerryTartlet @TheChiefNerd @P_McCulloughMD Plus there is a crisis of sloppiness in peer reviewed research. https://t.co/pwj60NQHDc
https://t.co/8w7NTFrqLp
In case you missed this in 2015. The unseen reproducibility crisis in basic and preclinical research (especially relevant to animal experiments) https://t.co/6BKvGw6HWa https://t.co/FVj7Wqr9L7
@mboudry Serieus?Die Nassir Gaemi kletst hier uit zijn nek, de correcte studie aanhalen waarnaar in het boek wordt verwezen was zelf te hoog gegrepen voor die man. Wat een fantast. https://t.co/4MbbDdm9Vn https://t.co/qIf8KDOch6
@KenSycspng @LordPerkins @buddha3321 @StephenNRA2 @KVandetti Like Dr's: Ryan Cole Robert Malone Peter McCullough Paul Marik Pierre Kory etc etc etc AND Is this the data you claim to be reviewing? 'Irreproducibility based on these empirical observations range from 75% to 90%' Irreproducibility = is this info correct? https://t.co/OlPMXKXGuE
@SalamonSMD @MatjazLeskovar @PeterMalovrh Vir: C. Glenn Begley and John P. Ioannidis, "Reproducibility in Science: Improving the Standard for Basic and Preclinical Research", Circulation Research 116, no. 1 (January 2015): 116–26, https://doi .org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.114.303819
一般ウケしやすい文献が積極的に発表されがち パッとしないデータは公表されないケースが多め 統計の数値を割りといじりやすい みたいな問題がある https://t.co/zw0INO5lcz #自分用メモ
@veen_els @leondewinter
@WybrenvanHaga Is de kwaliteit (#waarheidsspreken) van de studies dan niet nergens problematischer dan in de #medische wetenschap, zoals o.m. de 3 hieronder genoemde studies uitwezen? #replicatiecrisis #Fanelli #Ionnidis https://t.co/E96l8wPerL https://t.co/b4uiHeQEWx https://t.co/heZjUlkDVt
@MarionKoopmans @_knaw @RHDijkgraaf @vanranstmarc @erasmusuni Is de kwaliteit (#waarheidsspreken) van de studies dan niet nergens problematischer dan in de #medische wetenschap, zoals o.m. de 3 hieronder genoemde studies uitwezen? #replicatiecrisis #Fanelli #Ionnidis https://t.co/E96l8wPerL https://t.co/b4uiHeQEWx https://t.co/heZjUlkDVt
@StatsInTheWild Not separate issues (see enclosed on reproducibility concerns in biomedical research). https://t.co/NghdcXH6iI Plenty of additional articles available on the problems of reproducibility and medicine (e.g., the Lancet and NEJM retraction 2 years ago). https://t.co/UzcEHKtJyP
La investigación es una actividad humana que no ocurre en el vacío. Por ello es importante analizar el contexto en el que se desarrolla: si es uno que incentiva prácticas cuestionables, lo normal es que así las obtengamos https://t.co/xqpOEeGNoW https://t.co/WYiuagjAjp
Does the desperation to publish or perish create irreproducible results?https://t.co/PiNuKEVdEt
@tandfonline Thanks. Also, it's well known that the experimental unit, measure or other defined term for unit of analysis is often incorrectly identified, translating to incorrect analytics. https://t.co/mC2ue7KXHj https://t.co/QUegZul9bi https://t.co/IcHW5Ldvzj https://t.co/XGG5KMu7gX
@CubeSteve @CDogmatics @LustfulLiberal Nobody asserted a conspiracy. But if you like peer-reviewed journals with evidence as your authority for trust, you’re in luck! https://t.co/Xs8ltli1oa https://t.co/SxEQdaXZtv https://t.co/mhvY24feVL https://t.co/2mCgVEN49O
@El_Busby @JacobPoliticsKy @candleworth77 @ng0___ @TPUldi @Lars9596 @RealCandaceO @willtravers https://t.co/gaY9CaTVyK
@immunotoxPhD @Boxmenot @BeckyJohnson222 @lex6m @doritmi @ladybugobgyn @Plasticdoe @Raelove65451372 @CoercedTaxSlave @bruce_barrett @RogueTrader84 @GansenJared @KrochetxKorner @TYLERG927 @Anguish4ever @PileOfGoop @MsTrixter @VeritasEver @mcfunny @Siubhan_H @bobsnee @kmerian @ianfmusgrave @StopVaxxedLies @Sohnhicc @EmmaGPaley @45HammerTime @Nukem37 @amanda_pompili @t3tragrammat0n @kidoctr @TeddyFreddy11 @erikwilson1975 @Notyour28981739 @jjay_1984 @Stephaniethe2nd @BigTheyInc @Golfergirl2018 @DCataneo @SkepticalMutant @MAhealthforkids @JulieAMcLean @weaponizedword1 @kuriousmind93 @milnem @begarcia87 @laurast30381821 @Just4TheCause @michabird67 @KittyAmnezia 'concerns have been expressed for observational research where zero of 52 predictions from observational studies were confirmed in randomized clinical trials'. https://t.co/lAPL1akLKW
CP
MI
WM
JB
SW
YD
BS
E
L
J
PZ
M
PA
RK
GK
T
WS
RJ
YR
RD
MM