Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

Main page Policy/Terms of Use Abbreviations Latest Posts

 Log-in |  Register |  Search

Back to the forum  Query: 2017-12-11 18:17 CET (UTC+1h)

Crap… [Power / Sample Size]

posted by Helmut Homepage - Vienna, Austria, 2017-08-07 20:29  - Posting: # 17676
Views: 1,350

Hi nobody,

» Would not spend a single cent on such a nonsense. How does somethink like that survive peer review?
» Now that is published it will be referenced and used as "scientific basis" for further conclusions/studies.

That’s a slow-burn! My memory-span is better than ElMaestro’s (two weeks?) but it took me a while to recall. I was asked in May 2016 about my opinion. The editor wasn’t even sure whether he should reject the manuscript right away or initiate the review process. My response was: “The manuscript is without any scientific value.” I used some strong words which I won’t post here. Will send it to you by PM.

Obviously the editor didn’t listen to me and the reviewers were blind.
Explains why it is called “blind review”. :angry:

» How to get such trash retracted?

Practically impossible. You could writer a letter to the editor. Detlew and I tried that once, but the procedure was endless and after months (!) the editor of Pharm Res. suggested we should submit a full MS instead. This was not our intention. We didn’t discover anything new. Only wanted to point out that another article (which made it through the review) was pooh.

Helmut Schütz 

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. ☼
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

Back to the forum Activity
 Mix view
Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum | Admin contact
17,550 Posts in 3,757 Threads, 1,089 registered users;
34 users online (0 registered, 34 guests).

To know much is often the cause of doubting more.    Michel de Montaigne

BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz