Oh dear. The @DataColada crew finding some *very* concerning features in this study.http://datacolada.org/98
-
-
Replying to @jamesheathers @DataColada
I'm starting to wonder why people who have committed fraud share their data at all. Probably dozens of frauds in the lit done by people who've kept their raw data carefully hidden
3 replies 0 retweets 16 likes -
It's not known that the fraud shared the data (although the Duke office of investigatory burial is working on it). But if that's what happened, remember there was sequence of events: balance problem, replication, etc. And the data had already been shared internally.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
I don't just mean in this case - we've come across several datasets that have been posted online in the ivermectin literature that are clearly fake. Why would you do that?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Sometimes not all the authors know and that those who do dare not object? Also, an obligation may arise once you are too far in? Yet, I guess some people really believe their fakes are undetectable or safer hiding in plain sight. I think that happened in spidergate, too.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
Sometimes they lock their data with the password 1234, but sometimes they don't even bother with that
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.