along those lines one should also look at this NRDD paper: http://www.nature.com/nrd/journal/v11/n3/full/nrd3681.html Rather long but has lots of very useful citations.
If you ask industry people it's a know problem that 50% of their own experiments can't be reproduced but it's even worse if you go to academia. I would be careful though saying that this is due to fraud. Jürgen On Apr 7, 2012, at 6:31 PM, Dima Klenchin wrote: > Just came across it and thought it's quite relevant with regard to the > latest furor over fraud in crystallography: > > http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7391/pdf/483531a.pdf > > "53 papers were deemed 'landmark' studies ... scientific findings were > confirmed in only 6 (11%) cases". > > Mean number of citations: > non-reproduced articles* 169 (range 6–1,909) > reproduced articles* 13 (range 3–24) > > And yet, cell biology is steadily marching on with quite remarkable > progress each year... > > - Dima ...................... Jürgen Bosch Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health Department of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology Johns Hopkins Malaria Research Institute 615 North Wolfe Street, W8708 Baltimore, MD 21205 Office: +1-410-614-4742 Lab: +1-410-614-4894 Fax: +1-410-955-2926 http://web.mac.com/bosch_lab/
