Yeah. And before this, half of reviewers were submitting trivial, short reviews that either said "looks good to me" or "this is excrement". This is why reviews should be part of the public record for any paper. www.nature.com/articles/d41...

Surprised by the many bullshit citations first time looking into (chemical engineering) papers on toxicity of Bisphenol A. 708 citations of a paper starting with sentence: Water is amongst the most prominent resources in the universe (Karimi-Maleh et al., 2020c, 2021a, 2021b) tinyurl.com/2pv6ke2m

Six journals rejected their commentary. Six! Journal system is really lousy in facilitating proper scientific process. @ploederl.bsky.social Diamond OA journal @robustnessreports.bsky.social would be a perfect fit. But I can see why you tried psychiatry journals to reach the audience. Catch22.

Critique argues post-publication peer review "often focuses on minor details" and "risks damaging trust in both the research itself and the peer review process" found to contain: - Hallucinated references - Undisclosed COIs (EiC is author) - 8/9 authors have retractions or related scandals

#stats PSA: In January, I will host a workshop on "e-value". If you care about confounding, causal inference, and sensitivity analyses this is *not* for you; you are thinking of "E-value". Different thing. Different workshop. Isn't stats naming fun? What are ppl's thoughts on either of these two?

Hey @mdpiopenaccess.bsky.social - I understand you have a policy requiring pre-registration of clinical trials, yet you printed this one, registered after the fact. Why? Seems like it should be an easy policy to enforce. www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/17...

Achal Agrawal is on Nature’s list of 10 people who shaped science in 2025. His work helped change India’s university rankings system to include a penalty for large number of retractions. www.nature.com/articles/d41...

We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing: a 🧵 1/n Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820 Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/... Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...

Nature Sci Rep publishes incoherent AI slop. eLife publishes a paper which the reviewers didn't agree with, making all the comments and responses public with thoughtful commentary. One of these journals got delisted by Web of Science for quality concerns from not doing peer review. Guess which one?

The scandal of medical research still failing to adopt the Registered Report format for trial publications. Great example of failure to weed out Questionable Research Practices by clinical trial register (preregistration)+ journal review + multiple systematic reviews + guideline development process

BTW, I can recommend to get familiar with this one: www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1... It helps to judge the trustworthiness of RCTs

We did a thing. 😬

While a lot of people might focus on how this got published in the first place (rightfully) I wonder if we shouldn't also consider this a pretty huge win for BMJ's data sharing policy.

Can we improve peer review? We think we can! Check out an experiment I helped with as part of @solvingforsci.bsky.social 's mission to make science better. And if you don't want to read the whole bioRxiv manuscript, here's an overview of the main findings: solvingfor.org/news-posts-d...

Peter Doshi, who lead the RIAT initiative, writes about the recent legal actions on the 2001 publication of Study 329. Never heard about Study 329 or RIAT? Then I recommend reading this to understand the darker sides of EBM. www.bmj.com/content/391/...

Given increased use of single pivotal trials supporting FDA approval of new drugs & biologics, our study findings indicate a need for greater clarity & transparency by reviewers & sponsors on what evidence was considered to be confirmatory when approving drugs based on a single pivotal trial (7/8)

Radboud researchers René Aquarius @deadneanderthals.bsky.social and Kim Wever were about to embark on a literature review project when they noticed several odd things that made them stop in their tracks, then change the course of their study entirely.

Surprisingly, I4R has never been contacted by any of the authors' universities/funders. This is disappointing given that we documented irregularities in 10+ lengthy reports. That's easily 300 pages of data irregularities.

Fascinating graph shows the estimated total mass of all the mammals living on Earth. In 1850, it was evenly divided between wildlife and humans + domesticated animals. Today, humans and their livestock account for about 95% of the total. 🧪 www.nature.com/articles/s41...

We just started a website highlighting articles that would make good candidates for a Robustness Report. 🌐 Check out the website: www.journalofrobustnessreports.org 📄 Read our first blog post: www.journalofrobustnessreports.org/inaugural-po...

Against Publishing: universonline.nl/nieuws/2025/... Preprints are read, shared, and cited, yet still dismissed as incomplete until blessed by a publisher. I argue that the true measure of scholarship lies in open exchange, not in the industry’s gatekeeping of what counts as published.

Yesterday with the META/e group at Eindhoven we discussed the draft of the new Dutch Code for Research Integrity: www.nwo-i.nl/en/news/2025... It is great to see how much transparency and FAIR data and code will become the default expectation to adhere to research integrity.

Slordige Nieuwsuur items zetten de wetenschap onder druk. @www.sjamadriaan.nl heeft helemaal gelijk: "Zo kun je ook prima redeneren dat juist een podium geven aan Baudet, of andere notoire lariekoekgroottrutters, beperkend werkt voor de academische vrijheid." www.sjamadriaan.nl/p/wetenschap...

In general I think it's hard to combat scientific misinformation when some of the best research is locked behind an academic paywall, while lots of nonsense gets published free for everyone to read in predatory journals.

Outstanding tutorial on Game-theoretic Statistics and Sequential Anytime-Valid Inference by Aaditya Ramdas at #icml-2025. Slides at stat.cmu.edu/~aramdas/icm...

"Ending publication bias: A values-based approach to surface null and negative results" Paper out today in PLoS Medicine by many of us who would like to see publication bias reduced or eliminated. Especially happy that Registered Reports got shout-outs. journals.plos.org/plosbiology/...

Eens! Net lid geworden. Juist in deze tijd moeten we media steunen die nog wel tegen radicaal-rechts durven in te gaan. Dus hup, abonneer op @ftm.nl, @groene.nl, @oneworld.nl, @vn.nl en/of @decorrespondent.nl (En andere tips welkom.)

Want to be able to start micro-editing on Wikipedia in a few minutes – and know why you could be very glad you did? Then my new post @plos.org is just what you need! absolutelymaybe.plos.org/2025/09/21/w... #Wikipedia

Writing separately, but, I'd like to share a brief honest reflection on the experience of writing our paper on climate change health impact attribution, which is to date probably the hardest and most frustrating project of 100+ I've published in 15 years as a scientist.

Time is running out to register for our pre-symposium workshop and Meta Research Symposium event at Paul Meehl Graduate School Check the information and registration links below: paulmeehlschool.github.io/workshops/

To Prime Minister Netanyahu, an open letter from 23 economists at universities in the US and Europe. We urge you to read it. drive.google.com/file/d/1D_Sv...

J. D. Bernal in 1939 discussing how graduate students (only a thing from 1917 in the UK) are evaluated based on number and bulk, the publication pressure stifling originality, and filling the literature with useless papers.

Really nice to visit #GreenKayak during our stay in Bergen, Norway. Quite valuable trash in the Fjord. A great day to paddle and to be useful for cleaner oceans.

“In their analysis, the researchers excluded the last birth of each woman to reduce the influence of parental choice — for instance, some people choose to stop having children once they have both boys and girls.” Any analysis conditioning on number of children suffers from accumulation bias.

Given the importance of the topic, we might have pursued a journal with greater notoriety—but we prioritized BMC Medicine for its rigorous publication standards, as it is one of the few general medical journals—if not the only one—to offer registered reports.

Excellent! Journals should implement and test these tools as soon as possible! (While I don’t mind checking a clinical trial registration when reviewing, I can understand reviewers that do since I get annoyed when asked to check with a reporting guideline (which is boring).)

Laten we inderdaad een jubelton invoeren, maar dan net een beetje anders. 1. Iedereen die een huis koopt en er nog geen heeft, krijgt een ton van de overheid. 2. Dat financieren we dan door de overwaarde te belasten van de mensen die hun huis verkopen. 1/4

Very happy to have shared this project with the Open Science Community Amsterdam! Here is the story of why I nominated for OSCAward. A successful project that looks like a failure. Even with knowledge of how it turned out, I would do everything exactly the same significanthelp.nl/Blog/Scienti...

🎯 Does early success in science funding shape the rest of your career? New RoRI study says yes. The ‘Matthew effect’ — early winners keep winning — holds across funders & countries. 📄 Read more: researchonresearch.org/largest-stud...

Admirable effort by Mark Bolland, Alison Avenell and Andrew Grey to correct the literature. I would like a website to exist that automatically logs these journal screw-ups to counteract the ‘hearsay prestige’ that medical researchers attribute to jour that respond poorly to correction efforts[1/2]

This is excellent! I was recently told that it was not worth my time to act on every (major) medical paper I come across with a mistake in it. Now I think again: why not post on Pubpeer for every single one? This project gives me hope. We should do this, even at the expense of publishing less.

As a vegan, I'd love to claim the 86% increased odds of living to age 70 free of cogn/phys/ment/chron disease when eating plant-based. But I have trouble judging the statistical rigor. Anyone familiar that can explain how this study handled right-censoring? [1/2] www.nature.com/articles/s41...

As a vegan, I'd love to claim the 86% increased odds of living to age 70 free of cogn/phys/ment/chron disease when eating plant-based. But I have trouble judging the statistical rigor. Anyone familiar that can explain how this study handled right-censoring? [1/2] www.nature.com/articles/s41...

Blaming the scientific reform movement for undermining faith in science is dangerously naive. Public confidence has been damaged, not by raising attention to problems, but by failing to get our house in order. Pretending everything is OK will not solve that. And will not protect us from attack.

Came across an interesting 2023 JCE descriptive study of RCTs in the Registered Report format by Norah Anthony, Antoine Tisseaux, and @floriannaudet.bsky.social. It's a pity that it itsn't a Registered Report itself, which the authors point out as well. OA here: www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...

Feel this pain. statsepi.substack.com/p/the-review...

New post on ResToRes's website : "Transparency, at last: France’s call to open up clinical trials" France takes long-awaited steps to ensure clinical trial transparency. New national report calls for mandatory result posting and cultural change. restores.univ-rennes.fr/highlights/t...

We know that the system of journals and platforms like PubMed and Scopus is failing to inform readers of scientific criticism – given that many don't have the PubPeer plugin. I experienced that the system is also still failing to inform readers of scientific credit! (1/2)

As grant money starts drying up, it's more important than ever not to waste it on paying publishers' open access "article processing fees" when we can host PDFs for free. Tom Morgan and I wrote a paper on this, forthcoming at Science and Public Policy. Accepted draft here: osf.io/preprints/os...