Send to

Choose Destination
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013 Jan 1;20(1):125-7. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2012-000972. Epub 2012 Oct 4.

Scientific research in the age of omics: the good, the bad, and the sloppy.

Author information

Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.


It has been claimed that most research findings are false, and it is known that large-scale studies involving omics data are especially prone to errors in design, execution, and analysis. The situation is alarming because taxpayer dollars fund a substantial amount of biomedical research, and because the publication of a research article that is later determined to be flawed can erode the credibility of an entire field, resulting in a severe and negative impact for years to come. Here, we urge the development of an online, open-access, postpublication, peer review system that will increase the accountability of scientists for the quality of their research and the ability of readers to distinguish good from sloppy science.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Silverchair Information Systems Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center