along those lines one should also look at this NRDD paper:
http://www.nature.com/nrd/journal/v11/n3/full/nrd3681.html
Rather long but has lots of very useful citations.
If you ask industry people it's a know problem that 50% of their own experiments can't be reproduced but it's even worse if you go to academia.
I would be careful though saying that this is due to fraud.
Jürgen
On Apr 7, 2012, at 6:31 PM, Dima Klenchin wrote:
> Just came across it and thought it's quite relevant with regard to the
> latest furor over fraud in crystallography:
>
> http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7391/pdf/483531a.pdf
>
> "53 papers were deemed 'landmark' studies ... scientific findings were
> confirmed in only 6 (11%) cases".
>
> Mean number of citations:
> non-reproduced articles* 169 (range 6–1,909)
> reproduced articles* 13 (range 3–24)
>
> And yet, cell biology is steadily marching on with quite remarkable
> progress each year...
>
> - Dima
......................
Jürgen Bosch
Johns Hopkins University
Bloomberg School of Public Health
Department of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology
Johns Hopkins Malaria Research Institute
615 North Wolfe Street, W8708
Baltimore, MD 21205
Office: +1-410-614-4742
Lab: +1-410-614-4894
Fax: +1-410-955-2926
http://web.mac.com/bosch_lab/
|