←back to thread

Reproducibility project fails to validate dozens of biomedical studies

(www.nature.com)
246 points rntn | 1 comments | 25 Apr 25 16:14 UTC | HN request time: 0.214s | source
Show context
N_A_T_E ◴[25 Apr 25 16:58 UTC] No.43795965[source]▶
Is there any path forward to fixing the current reproducibility crisis in science? Individuals can do better, but that won't solve a problem at this scale. Could we make systemic changes to how papers are validated and approved for publication in major journals?
replies(12): >>43796160 #>>43796211 #>>43796313 #>>43796358 #>>43796415 #>>43796725 #>>43796906 #>>43796908 #>>43796955 #>>43797084 #>>43797605 #>>43797627 #
1. pieisgood ◴[25 Apr 25 18:18 UTC] No.43796906[source]▶
I had always envisioned an institute for reproducibility & Peer review. It would be a federally funded institute that would require Phd candidate participation as an additional requirement to receive your degree. Really it wouldn't be a single place but office or team at each university where proper equipment was available and perhaps similar conditions for reproducing specific research. Of course the feasibility of this is pretty low.