This also makes sense: the industry has to use these studies to get drugs through regulatory authorities. Bad studies are less likely to lead to an approved drug!
-
-
People who have a stake in the game are just less likely to publish research that might mean they will make less money. They also won't promote it, and may make it more difficult to access for everyone This is, in many ways, much worse than simply doing bad studies
Show this thread -
Bad studies are easy to find, easy to discard, easy to ignore. Most studies I've read on acupuncture, for example, are just awful Can't conclude anything from bad research!
Show this thread -
But by only publishing positive studies, and only promoting the very best ones, industries can manipulate the narrative by using basic statistical fact: Do enough studies and some of them will be VERY positive
Show this thread -
Some of them will be very negative too, but since you can control what gets published, people only see the good and never even hear about the bad
Show this thread -
All of this to say: the industry can produce hundreds of amazingly well-done studies and STILL do things in a dodgy way, which is why you should support
@senseaboutsci and pre-registration efforts everywhere!Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.