Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Methodology over metrics: current scientific standards are a disservice to patients and society.
Van Calster, Ben; Wynants, Laure; Riley, Richard D; van Smeden, Maarten; Collins, Gary S.
  • Van Calster B; Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands; EPI-Centre, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. Electronic address: ben.vancalster@kuleuven.be.
  • Wynants L; Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; EPI-Centre, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Epidemiology, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
  • Riley RD; Centre for Prognosis Research, School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, UK.
  • van Smeden M; Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Collins GS; Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK; UK EQUATOR Centre, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics,
J Clin Epidemiol ; 138: 219-226, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1253151
ABSTRACT
Covid-19 research made it painfully clear that the scandal of poor medical research, as denounced by Altman in 1994, persists today. The overall quality of medical research remains poor, despite longstanding criticisms. The problems are well known, but the research community fails to properly address them. We suggest that most problems stem from an underlying paradox although methodology is undeniably the backbone of high-quality and responsible research, science consistently undervalues methodology. The focus remains more on the destination (research claims and metrics) than on the journey. Notwithstanding, research should serve society more than the reputation of those involved. While we notice that many initiatives are being established to improve components of the research cycle, these initiatives are too disjointed. The overall system is monolithic and slow to adapt. We assert that top-down action is needed from journals, universities, funders and governments to break the cycle and put methodology first. These actions should involve the widespread adoption of registered reports, balanced research funding between innovative, incremental and methodological research projects, full recognition and demystification of peer review, improved methodological review of reports, adherence to reporting guidelines, and investment in methodological education and research. Currently, the scientific enterprise is doing a major disservice to patients and society.
Subject(s)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Research Design / Biomedical Research Type of study: Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials / Reviews Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Journal subject: Epidemiology Year: 2021 Document Type: Article

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Research Design / Biomedical Research Type of study: Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials / Reviews Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Journal subject: Epidemiology Year: 2021 Document Type: Article