Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis.
Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62227-8
复制
发表时间：
2014-01-11
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Tibshirani R
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ioannidis JP;Greenland S;Hlatky MA;Khoury MJ;Macleod MR;Moher D;Schulz KF;Tibshirani R
生物医学和公共卫生研究研究在设计、实施和分析方面存在可纠正的缺陷，可能会产生误导性的结果并浪费宝贵的资源。微小的影响可能很难与研究设计和分析引入的偏差区分开来。缺乏详细的书面方案和糟糕的研究文件是很常见的。所获得的信息可能没有用处或不重要，而且统计精度或力量往往太低或以误导性方式使用。以往的研究和继续进行的研究可能都考虑不足。分析的随意选择和对随机极端的过度强调可能会影响报告的结果。有几个问题与研究队伍有关，包括没有让有经验的统计学家和方法学家参与进来，没有对临床研究人员和实验室科学家进行研究方法和设计方面的培训，以及利益相关者的参与与利益冲突有关。对研究决定的记录和研究的可重复性重视不够。最后，奖励制度激励的是数量而非质量，激励的是新颖性而非可靠性。我们为这些问题提出了可能的解决方案，包括改进方案和文件，考虑来自正在进行的研究的证据，标准化研究努力，优化和培训一支经验丰富且不存在冲突的科学队伍，以及重新考虑科学奖励制度。
Correctable weaknesses in the design, conduct, and analysis of biomedical and public health research studies can produce misleading results and waste valuable resources. Small effects can be difficult to distinguish from bias introduced by study design and analyses. An absence of detailed written protocols and poor documentation of research is common. Information obtained might not be useful or important, and statistical precision or power is often too low or used in a misleading way. Insufficient consideration might be given to both previous and continuing studies. Arbitrary choice of analyses and an overemphasis on random extremes might affect the reported findings. Several problems relate to the research workforce, including failure to involve experienced statisticians and methodologists, failure to train clinical researchers and laboratory scientists in research methods and design, and the involvement of stakeholders with conflicts of interest. Inadequate emphasis is placed on recording of research decisions and on reproducibility of research. Finally, reward systems incentivise quantity more than quality, and novelty more than reliability. We propose potential solutions for these problems, including improvements in protocols and documentation, consideration of evidence from studies in progress, standardisation of research efforts, optimisation and training of an experienced and non-conflicted scientific workforce, and reconsideration of scientific reward systems.