Some Cancer Studies Fail to Replicate. That Might Be OK

  • 📰 WIRED
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 36 sec. here
  • 2 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 18%
  • Publisher: 51%

Health Health Headlines News

Health Health Latest News,Health Health Headlines

“What they’ve done is taken papers that have already received attention within the scientific community, and then they’ve set out to try and determine whether or not that work could be independently reproduced.” (From 2021)

Science obviously works, broadly. So why is it so hard to replicate an experiment? “One answer is: Science is hard,” Errington says. “That’s why we fund research and invest billions of dollars just to make sure cancer research can have an impact on people’s lives. Which it does.”

The point of less-than-great outcomes like the cancer project’s is to distinguish between what’s good for science internally and what’s good for science when it reaches civilians. “There are two orthogonal concepts here. One is transparency, and one is validity,” says Shirley Wang, an epidemiologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital.

The point, then, isn’t to critique specific results. It’s to make science more transparent, which should in turn make the results more replicable, more understandable, maybe even more likely to translate to the clinic. Right now, academic researchers don’t have an incentive to publish work that other researchers can replicate. The incentive is just to publish.

 

Thank you for your comment. Your comment will be published after being reviewed.
Please try again later.
We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:

 /  🏆 555. in HEALTH

Health Health Latest News, Health Health Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Colonoscopies save lives. Doctors push back against European study that casts doubtColon cancer specialists worry that results of a study published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine could be misconstrued, and keep patients from getting lifesaving cancer screening. It's disappointing that you follow Dr. Petersen's lead in misunderstanding the strengths of the study (being large, randomized, controlled). Doing what Dr. Petersen suggests here effectively does away with the randomization, reintroduces confounders and means very little.
Source: NPRHealth - 🏆 144. / 63 Read more »

Uncertain role for colonoscopy screening⭐ Research Highlight: Despite a reduction in colorectal cancer incidence, a large, randomized study shows no impact of colonoscopy screening on cancer-related deaths (though screening uptake was low) NEJM
Source: NatureMedicine - 🏆 451. / 53 Read more »

Trending Clinical Topic: Folic AcidNew research showing folic acid's benefit in liver disease, gastric conditions, and suicidality was joined by a study on potential for cancer development, leading to the top trending topic this week.
Source: Medscape - 🏆 386. / 55 Read more »

Lifetime of Stress Tied to Big Rise in Cancer Risk - MedicineNet Health NewsOver time, men and women under chronic stress face a significantly higher risk that they will die as a result of cancer, a new study warns.
Source: MedicineNet - 🏆 575. / 51 Read more »

Moderna and Merck Will Jointly Develop a Cancer Vaccine for High-Risk Melanoma PatientsModerna's messenger RNA vaccine is being studied in combination with Merck's Keytruda to treat patients with high-risk melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer, in a phase two trial.
Source: NBCLA - 🏆 319. / 59 Read more »

Patients With Cancer Are at a Lower Risk of DementiaPatients with cancer had a lower risk of all-cause dementia and its subtypes such as Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia, study finds.
Source: Medscape - 🏆 386. / 55 Read more »