How reliable are scientific studies?
- 1 October 2010
- journal article
- Published by Royal College of Psychiatrists in The British Journal of Psychiatry
- Vol. 197 (4), 257-258
- https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.109.069849
Abstract
Summary: There is growing concern that a substantial proportion of scientific research may in fact be false. A number of factors have been proposed as contributing to the presence of a large number of false-positive results in the literature, one of which is publication bias. We discuss empirical evidence for these factors.Keywords
This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- Gene × Environment Interactions at the Serotonin Transporter LocusBiological Psychiatry, 2009
- Bias in genetic association studies and impact factorMolecular Psychiatry, 2009
- A meta-analytic investigation of the relationship between attentional bias and subjective craving in substance abuse.Psychological Bulletin, 2009
- 5‐HTTLPR genotype and anxiety‐related personality traits: A meta‐analysis and new dataNeuropsychiatric Genetics, Part B of the American Journal of Medical Genetics (AJMG), 2008
- Serotonin Transporter (5-HTTLPR) Genotype and Amygdala Activation: A Meta-AnalysisBiological Psychiatry, 2008
- Letter to the Editor: Bias in genetic association studies: effects of research location and resourcesPsychological Medicine, 2008
- An exploratory test for an excess of significant findingsClinical Trials, 2007
- Spurious Genetic AssociationsBiological Psychiatry, 2007
- Why Most Published Research Findings Are FalsePLoS Medicine, 2005
- Scientists behaving badlyNature, 2005