Flawed Research Research Articles

Aligning buzzword trends of sustainability with true sustainable development

ABSTRACT ‘Sustainability’ has become such a buzzword that its widespread use impacts both its research and practical application, for better or worse. Effective sustainability research should guide implementation, while successful initiatives depend on strong research. To bridge the gap between theory and practice, collaboration between researchers and stakeholders is crucial. High-quality research can amplify the positive effects of sustainability, while flawed research may hinder progress. Harnessing the benefits of its buzzword status is key to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2030.

Identifying and Minimizing Incentives for Competing Interests in Sports Medicine Publications.

Academics in sports medicine as well as other medical fields are generally expected to publish research and opinions in peer-reviewed journals. The peer-review process is intended to protect against the publication of flawed research and unsubstantiated claims. However, both financial and non-financial competing interests may result in sub-optimal results by affecting investigators, editors, peer reviewers, academic institutions, and publishers. In this article, we focus on the non-financial competing interests created in our current academic system. Because these competing interests are embedded in our current scholastic framework, the potential biases are difficult to quantify. To minimize the effect of these competing interests, we review and highlight some underlying incentives for each stakeholder and some potential solutions to mitigate their effects.

Research needs to become popular

Open access (sometimes referred to as Public Access in the US) to academic publications and FAIR research data increases public scrutiny in research, but these two directions of travel are not enough to produce a profound change for the society and the research culture itself.Let’s be frank: Research is still an elitist activity, defined by a hermetic culture. Some call it “The Ivory Tower”. Ordinary people know little about research practices and, with a few exceptions, people are not used to contributing to and consuming research. One effect of this elitist state is that Research became a small-community, well-oiled machine based on public grants and proxy-style assessments. Meanwhile, 70% of Research remains nonreplicable, and the research community continues to struggle to sink this number. This is bad. For this reason and with respect to what Research represents (hopes, needs, healthy progress and, more recently, reparations) both Research and Society need deeper scrutiny tools to understand and encourage participation in the process of creating knowledge.At the same time, we remain slow in identifying flawed research. Lives, hopes and important resources are lost that way. Too many researchers are complacent about the system. Left alone, Peer Review is not capable enough to distill good from bad research. The lack of public scrutiny into how knowledge is produced remains a cause for sideslips in research.This presentation challenges the current understanding that Research should remain an esoteric sector of our society. In a “message-from-the-future” manner, this presentation promotes the idea of open and participatory research and invites the audience to coalesce to make possible a deeper and healthier scrutiny of research activities.Starting with a declaration in Rome (2014) and continuing with theoretical frameworks, monitoring programmes, and practitioners’ networks, the EU triggered a series of actions around what is called Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). It constitutes an important building block for “aligning research and innovation to the values, needs and expectations of society”. While progress has been slow, it has the potential to improve Research and the relationship between science and society. Recognising the work surrounding RRI, this presentation invites the audience to travel beyond the RRI horizon: to imagine a world in which Society feels welcomed and invited into the researchers’ world.Through a comparison with the evolution of gastronomy, this presentation provokes the audience to imagine how the world could be changed by turning research into a popular culture, like literature, music, travel, and gastronomy turned out to be. Cultures become popular when ideas, customs, and behaviours are embraced by large parts of the population. They have the potential to become part of community identity when they are strong enough to mark with their characteristics the past, the present and the future. Literature, Gastronomy, Music, and others did it. What kind of world would we get if Research achieved the same? Setting this question in a thoughtful manner is the main novelty of this presentation.Another possible novelty could be the presentation style which will be unusual, with the presenter speaking from the year 2065 to an audience from 2025.In summary, the role of this presentation is to inspire the audience. It promotes the idea that research deserves to be a popular culture and gives a vision about a possible future for Research.

The association between playing professional American football and longevity.

Recent research concludes that professional American football players (hereafter, "football players") live longer than American men in general, despite experiencing higher rates of chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) and cardiovascular disease (CVD). This suggests that the longevity-enhancing benefits of playing football (e.g., physical fitness, money) outweigh the costs associated with CTE, CVD, and other longevity detriments of playing football. However, these surprising results may be the consequence of flawed research design. To investigate, we conducted two analyses. In analysis 1, we compared a) all professional American football players whose first season was 1986 or between 1988 and 1995 to b) a random sample of same-age American men observed as part of the National Health Interview Surveys in those same years selected on good health, at least 3 y of college, and not being poor. The exposure consists of playing one or more games of professional football; the outcome is risk of death within 25 y. In analysis 2, we use data on 1,365 men drafted to play in the (American) National Football League in the 1950s-906 of whom ultimately played professional football, and 459 of whom never played a game in any professional league. We estimate the association between playing football and survival through early 2023. In both analyses, we investigate differences between linemen and other position players. In contrast to most prior research, in both analyses, we find that linemen died earlier than otherwise similar men; men who played other positions died no earlier (or later).

Controls, comparator arms, and designs for critical care comparative effectiveness research: It's complicated.

Comparative effectiveness research is meant to determine which commonly employed medical interventions are most beneficial, least harmful, and/or most costly in a real-world setting. While the objectives for comparative effectiveness research are clear, the field has failed to develop either a uniform definition of comparative effectiveness research or an appropriate set of recommendations to provide standards for the design of critical care comparative effectiveness research trials, spurring controversy in recent years. The insertion of non-representative control and/or comparator arm subjects into critical care comparative effectiveness research trials can threaten trial subjects' safety. Nonetheless, the broader scientific community does not always appreciate the importance of defining and maintaining critical care practices during a trial, especially when vulnerable, critically ill populations are studied. Consequently, critical care comparative effectiveness research trials sometimes lack properly constructed control or active comparator arms altogether and/or suffer from the inclusion of "unusual critical care" that may adversely affect groups enrolled in one or more arms. This oversight has led to critical care comparative effectiveness research trial designs that impair informed consent, confound interpretation of trial results, and increase the risk of harm for trial participants. We propose a novel approach to performing critical care comparative effectiveness research trials that mandates the documentation of critical care practices prior to trial initiation. We also classify the most common types of critical care comparative effectiveness research trials, as well as the most frequent errors in trial design. We present examples of these design flaws drawn from past and recently published trials as well as examples of trials that avoided those errors. Finally, we summarize strategies employed successfully in well-designed trials, in hopes of suggesting a comprehensive standard for the field. Flawed critical care comparative effectiveness research trial designs can lead to unsound trial conclusions, compromise informed consent, and increase risks to research subjects, undermining the major goal of comparative effectiveness research: to inform current practice. Well-constructed control and comparator arms comprise indispensable elements of critical care comparative effectiveness research trials, key to improving the trials' safety and to generating trial results likely to improve patient outcomes in clinical practice.

The effectiveness of peer review in identifying issues leading to retractions

Retractions are necessary to remove flawed research from citable literature but cannot offset the negative impact those publications have on science advances and public trust. The editorial peer-review process is intended to prevent flawed research from being published. However, there is limited empirical evidence of its effectiveness in identifying issues that lead to retractions. This study analyzed the peer-review comments (provided by Clarivate Analytics) for a sample of retracted publications (provided by Retraction Watch) to investigate how the peer-review process effectively detects the areas where the retraction causes lie and whether reviewer characteristics are related to the effectiveness. We found that a small proportion of peer reviews suggested rejections during the peer review stage, while about half suggested acceptance or minor revision for those later retracted papers. The peer-review process was more effective in identifying retraction causes related to data, methods, and results than those related to text plagiarism and references. Additionally, factors such as reviewer seniority and the level of match between reviewers’ expertise and the submission were significant in determining the possibility of peer reviews identifying suspicious areas in submissions. We discussed potential insights from these findings and called for collective efforts to prevent retractions.

Special education's zombies and their consequences

AbstractZombies are defined as ideas or persistent myths that should have died out but have not. Special education's biggest zombie is that only full inclusion brings about true social justice and the most effective education for students with disabilities. Three examples of specific zombies about full inclusion are presented. First, that full inclusion has been internationally accepted policy since the Salamanca Statement in 1994. Second, that the feasibility of full inclusion has been demonstrated in some countries. Third, that there is extensive evidence that inclusion is more effective that special education. Six strategies that have been used to promote these inclusion zombies to the general public and legislators in various countries around the world are discussed. These are: reframing the problem; denying its reality; portraying special education as something of which most people disapprove; presenting full inclusion as something most people want; making the distinction between the two maximally stark; casting all challenges to the zombie as addressing the wrong question or relying on flawed research and demanding unthinking belief in full inclusion. It is concluded that special education's zombies related to full inclusion must be exposed, challenged and finally eradicated so that future education provision for children with disabilities can focus on achievable goals and evidence of effectiveness rather than placement. Key points Special education's biggest zombie is that only full inclusion will bring true social justice to schooling because special education is essentially an inappropriate way of dealing with diversity; is a relic of the last century, unfairly discriminatory and exclusionary. Three inclusion zombies are: that full inclusion was recommended by the Salamanca Framework; that full inclusion has been shown to be a feasible approach to meeting all special needs; and that there is convincing research evidence that inclusion is more effective than special education. All three zombies are false but widely disseminated. Six strategies are used to promote full inclusion zombies: reframe the nature of the problem; deny the reality of the situation; portray special education as something generally disapproved of; present inclusion as something most people want; make a stark distinction between the two; cast all challenges to the zombie as flawed. Full inclusion zombies must be exposed, challenged, and eradicated, so that continued development of theory, research and practice in the education of young people with special needs can once again be the main focus of educators in this field.

The Rise of Fake and Clone Journals in Medical Sciences: A Threat to Research Integrity

Open-access publishing has made research sharing and access easier, but it has also led to the proliferation of deceitful journals that exploit the author-pay model, endangering research integrity. These journals appear trustworthy, claim high impact factors, but lack review information and editorial board details. Identifying fake journals is challenging, but researchers can use indicators like thorough website examination, searching for additional contact information, and verifying indexing in reputable databases. Clone journals are fraudulent replicas of authentic ones that deceive authors and readers with identical names, logos, and designs. They lack peer reviews and publish flawed or deceitful research. Medical research is particularly vulnerable, with even prominent journals falling victim. Fake and cloned journals misguide researchers, clinicians, and policymakers, harming public health and undermining genuine research credibility. To protect valuable findings, researchers must stay vigilant, evaluate journals carefully, and choose reputable ones with rigorous peer-review processes and high impact factors. By doing so, researchers ensure comprehensive evaluation and contribute to medical science advancement. Addressing the issue requires collective attention from researchers, publishers, and policymakers, preserving research integrity and public well-being.

The Relevance of the Phenomenological Method of Epoché and Reduction for Psychology

Abstract Husserl’s (2023) “Paradox of the Psychological Reduction,” with support and elucidation from Husserl’s published writings, shows the necessity of employing the phenomenological epoché and reduction in order to perform valid psychological research. The relationship between the transcendental and psychological reductions, including their closeness, differences, and peculiar identity are explored. Although necessary, the phenomenological method does not guarantee true psychological knowledge but rather requires a reflexive, self-critical, self-corrective historical process that confronts and overcomes naturalistic prejudice and other misguiding assumptions and dogma as well as superficial and flawed research performances. Phenomenological psychology and philosophy are inseparable, in a bidirectional relationship that informs the socio-cultural sciences including empirical psychology and all disciplines that study persons, communities, human artifacts, and humanity. The implications and relevance of phenomenological method are spelled out in light of the history and contemporary challenges of psychology.

Homage to Dr. Murray Enkin and the complexity of evidence-based medicine.

Homage to Dr. Murray Enkin and the complexity of evidence-based medicine.

Manhattan Project genetic studies: Flawed research discredits LNT recommendations

This paper reexamines the technical report (∼ one page) of Uphoff and Stern (1949) in Science that was highly relied upon by the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation (BEAR) I Genetics Panel to support a linearity dose response for radiation risk assessment. The present paper demonstrates that research of Uphoff and Stern (1949) to evaluate whether total dose or dose rate best estimated radiation risks included two variables, thereby precluding the ability to accurately derive a reliable conclusion about this topic. Furthermore, the acute dose selected by Uphoff and Stern was given at a strikingly low dose rate that may have precluded the capacity to adequately test the total dose/dose rate hypothesis, even with a proper study design which also this research did not possess. The issue of total dose and dose rate was much later successfully addressed by Russell et al. (1958) using a murine model, yielding a dose-rate rather than a total dose conclusion. The failure to subject the experimental details of the Uphoff and Stern (1949) study to peer-review and publication in the open literature precluded a rigorous and necessary evaluation, profoundly and improperly impacting the adoption of the linear dose response model.

The Case Against Higher-Order Metaphysics

Although higher-order metaphysics seems prima facie to be a promising new approach to metaphysics, it is nonetheless based on a mistake. This mistake is tied to a misuse of formal languages in metaphysics in general, not just to the use of higher-order rather than lower-order languages. I hope to highlight the mistake by discussing a popular recent example of higher- order metaphysics: the argument that reality is not structured using reasoning inspired by the Russell-Myhill paradox. A key issue will be the relationship between higher-order quantification in formal languages and quantification in English, in particular the questions whether such quantifiers are already to be found in English, and whether they could simply be added to English if not in order to gain expressive strength. I will conclude that little of metaphysical significance follows from this Russell-Myhill inspired argument against structure. The reason why the results of higher-order logic show little of metaphysical significance generalizes to other uses of higher-order logic in metaphysical theorizing, and with it supports that higher-order metaphysics is a flawed research program. I end with some reflections on what positive role formal tools like higher-order logic can have in metaphysics, and what the fundamental mistake is on which higher-order metaphysics is based.

The Sensitivity of Research on COVID-19

Beall’s list heavily used as a base for selection of predatory journals by large no. of research studies was ceased from internet in 2017. Thus, status of journal declared as predatory in list is debatable. To verify quality of journals in terms of accuracy and standard of peer review, a sample of Medical Science journals from Beall list and indexed in reputed indexing/abstracting databases was taken. sample of journals was put to quality and credibility check by submitting a deliberately flawed research article. deliberate errors exceed an acceptable norm in submitted research paper. It is astonishing to see that majority of journals (61.96%) accept flawed article on such a sensitive issue, i.e., COVID-19 without peer review and desired revisions. Instant mails reporting paper's acceptance, preceded by multiple emails requesting for submission for Article processing fee, were received frequently. It is found that such publishing ventures are a scare story that only wants to generate as much revenue as possible.

Do retraction practices work effectively? Evidence from citations of psychological retracted articles

Scientific retraction practices are intended to help purge the continued use of flawed research and assist in maintaining the integrity, credibility and quality of scientific literature. However, the practical effect of retraction is still vague and needs to be further explored. In this study, we analysed the citation counts and sentiments (positive/negative) of retracted articles in psychology journals from Web of Science to explore the effect of retraction. Causal inference strategies were used to measure the net effect of retractions on citation. Results show that the retraction practices induced the citation counts to reduce as expected. However, the proportion of negative citations also decreased because of retraction, indicating an unsatisfied effect. The retraction practice of high-impact factors and open access journals was more effective than other journals. The study integrated an understanding of the dissemination of erroneous publications and provided implications for liabilities involved in the whole retraction process.

Keyword expansion techniques for mining social movement data on social media

Political and social scientists have been relying extensively on keywords such as hashtags to mine social movement data from social media sites, particularly Twitter. Yet, prior work demonstrates that unrepresentative keyword sets can lead to flawed research conclusions. Numerous keyword expansion methods have been proposed to increase the comprehensiveness of keywords, but systematic evaluations of these methods have been lacking. Our paper fills this gap. We evaluate five diverse keyword expansion techniques (or pipelines) on five representative social movements across two distinct activity levels. Our results guide researchers who aim to use social media keyword searches to mine data. For instance, we show that word embedding-based methods significantly outperform other even more complex and newer approaches when movements are in normal activity periods. These methods are also less computationally intensive. More importantly, we also observe that no single pipeline can identify little more than half of all movement-related tweets when these movements are at their peak mobilization period offline. However, coverage can increase significantly when more than one pipeline is used. This is true even when the pipelines are selected at random.

On getting it right by being wrong: A case study of how flawed research may become self-fulfilling at last

Scientists prominently argue that the COVID-19 pandemic stems not least from people’s inability to understand exponential growth. They increasingly cite evidence from a classic psychological experiment published some 45 years prior to the first case of COVID-19. Despite—or precisely because of—becoming such a canonical study (more often cited than read), its critical design flaws went completely unnoticed. They are discussed here as a cautionary tale against uncritically enshrining unsound research in the “lore” of a field of research. In hindsight, this is a unique case study of researchers falling prey to just the cognitive bias they set out to study—undermining an experiment’s methodology while, ironically, still supporting its conclusion.

FDA Should Re-evaluate All mRNA Vaccines and Revoke Their Use Authorizations (The Short Version).

Drug industry, controlling medical publishers and large media promote flawed medicine for their revenues by systematically laundering medical knowledge in decades. They maintain and promote flawed research models and suppress disruptive discoveries, thereby precluding reform of medicine. In this study, I will deeply explore how the wrong life model, population-based research model, misused clinical trials, flawed statistical models, the symptom based research methods, binary disease classification, failure to address the massive vital organ capacities, failure to correct biases caused by expected delay in realizing side effects, and failure to address the interference effects of non-controllable factors affect the conclusions of “effectiveness and safety” for mRNA vaccines. I will directly analyze three studies that have been relied upon by FDA in approving mNRA use authorizations: one BNT162b2 effectiveness study published in NEJM, one booster shot study published in NEJM and a Seven Integrated Health Care Organizations study published by CDC. I will expose fatal flaws in the frequency risk concept, effectiveness rate, and hazard reduction ratios, and show why 3% death rate, 95% effectiveness rate and 90% mortality reduction are all meaningless and misleading, and should never have been used as treatment guidance. I will also examine common biases that can be easily practiced by sponsors’ researchers to alter conclusions in favor of approval. By relying on laundered medical “knowledge”, FDA has consistently failed to predict latent drug side effects for any drugs and vaccines in its history. FDA approved disastrous DES in 1941, Swine Flu vaccine in 1976, and mRNA vaccines in 2020. The vaccines are used to deliver short-term benefits on a small percent of persons at the costs of damaging health, causing deaths that could be avoided, and shortening lifespans for all people in the population. I thus urge FDA to reevaluate all mRNA vaccines and revoke their use authorizations.

Critical Response to "A Short History of K-12 Public School Spending in British Columbia"

In Issue 196 of the Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy (CJEAP), the journal published an article by Jason Ellis, A Short History of K-12 Public School Spending in British Columbia, 1970-2020 that claimed “K-12 public education spending in British Columbia – adjusted for inflation – is 250 percent higher in 2020 than it was in 1970” (Ellis, 2021, p. 102). We illustrate how this claim lacks a theoretical framework, is based on weak data sources, a flawed research method and skewed analysis that results in a misleading understanding of resource allocations in BC. We present alternative ways to understand spending on education in BC in an effort to correct the scholarly and public record.

Practical consequences of flawed social psychological research on bias.

The flaws in social psychological research pointed out by Cesario have societal costs. These include ignoring crucial base rates thereby degrading the effectiveness of policy decisions, generalizing the conclusions derived from experiments on non-professionals thereby distorting the public's view of professional law enforcement personnel, questionable accusations of racism, and mis-attributions of the causes of racial differences in behavior.

Using preprints in evidence synthesis: Commentary on experience during the COVID-19 pandemic

Using preprints in evidence synthesis: Commentary on experience during the COVID-19 pandemic