ASSESSING THE UNRELIABILITY OF THE MEDICAL LITERATURE: A RESPONSE TO "WHY MOST PUBLISHED RESEARCH FINDINGS ARE FALSE"

A recent article in this journal (Ioannidis JP (2005) Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med 2: e124) argued that more than half of published research findings in the medical literature are false. In this commentary, we examine the structure of that argument, and show that it has three basic components: 1)An assumption that the prior probability of most hypotheses explored in medical research is below 50%. 2)Dichotomization of P-values at the 0.05 level and introduction of a “bias” factor (produced by significance-seeking), the combination of which severely weakens the evidence provided by every design. 3)Use of Bayes theorem to show that, in the face of weak evidence, hypotheses with low prior probabilities cannot have posterior probabilities over 50%. Thus, the claim is based on a priori assumptions that most tested hypotheses are likely to be false, and then the inferential model used makes it impossible for evidence from any study to overcome this handicap. We focus largely on step (2), explaining how the combination of dichotomization and “bias” dilutes experimental evidence, and showing how this dilution leads inevitably to the stated conclusion. We also demonstrate a fallacy in another important component of the argument –that papers in “hot” fields are more likely to produce false findings. We agree with the paper’s conclusions and recommendations that many medical research findings are less definitive than readers suspect, that P-values are widely misinterpreted, that bias of various forms is widespread, that multiple approaches are needed to prevent the literature from being systematically biased and the need for more data on the prevalence of false claims. But calculating the unreliability of the medical research literature, in whole or in part, requires more empirical evidence and different inferential models than were used. The claim that “most research findings are false for most research designs and for most fields” must be considered as yet unproven.

The jews of Baltimore : an historical summary of their progress and status as citizens of Baltimore from early days to the year 1910

by Isidor Blum. With special contrib. by William Rosenau ...

Differences in small-for-gestational-age and preterm birth among Asian subgroups in relation to nativity status

This retrospective cohort study examined the association between nativity status and very preterm birth, preterm birth, and small-for-gestational-age (SGA) among Asian subgroups using Texas birth certificate data with no personal identifiers. A total of 877,322 birth certificates of Asian and US-born white women with a singleton birth in Texas from 2001-2004 were analyzed. Birth certificate records of US-born white, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Filipino, and Asian Indian women with a singleton birth were included in the analysis. Logistic regressions models were used to explore and understand the differences of the effect of nativity status on birth outcomes in Asian subgroups with US-born whites as the reference group. Most of the Asian subgroups had a lower risk of preterm births compared with US born whites, with reductions in risk ranging from 19% to 49% and the lowest risk of preterm birth observed among foreign-born Chinese mothers. Only Filipino mothers had a higher risk of preterm birth compared to US-born whites. Overall, foreign-born Asians had lower risks for very preterm birth and preterm birth than US-born Asians and US-born whites. US-born Asians were at higher risk for preterm birth than US-born whites. For SGA, all Asian subgroups and Asian subgroups by nativity status were at higher risk of SGA than US-born whites. Asian Indians and Japanese were at highest risk for SGA infants with 2.5 to 3 times the risk of SGA present in US-born whites. Foreign-born Asian women were at higher risk for SGA than their US-born counterparts. This study showed that health disparities among Asian subgroups are hidden by classifying Asians into a single group. By examining Asian subgroups separately and looking at nativity status, the differences in risk of SGA and preterm birth can be revealed so prevention efforts can focus on high risk groups. ^

Magnetic susceptibility dataset from the early Givetian to early Frasnian in the La Thure section

Recent advances in radiometric dating result in significant improvements in the geological timescale and provide better insight into the timing of various processes and evolutions within the Earth's system. However, no radiometric ages are contained within the Givetian. Consequently, the absolute ages of the Givetian Stage boundaries, as well as the stage's duration, remain poorly constrained. As an alternative, the analysis of sedimentary cycles allows for the estimation of the duration of this stage. We examined the high-resolution magnetic susceptibility signals of four Givetian outcrops in the Givet area for a possible astronomical imprint, to fully understand the rates of evolutionary and environmental change. All four sections are firmly correlated and wavelet analyses of the magnetic susceptibility signals reveal the imprint of astronomical eccentricity forcing. The highly stable 405 kyr cycles constrain the duration of the Givetian Stage at 4.35±0.45 Myr, which is in good agreement with the International Chronostratigraphic Chart (5.0 Myr). The studied sections also exhibit an imprint of obliquity, suggesting a climatic teleconnection between low and high latitudes. The corresponding microfacies curves demonstrate similar astronomical imprint, and thereby indicate that the observed 10**5 year-scale cyclicity is the result of climatic and environmental change.