Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

Main page Policy/Terms of Use Abbreviations Latest Posts

 Log-in |  Register |  Search

Back to the forum  Query: 2017-08-17 01:35 CEST (UTC+2h)

Crap… [Power / Sample Size]

posted by Helmut Homepage - Vienna, Austria, 2017-08-07 20:29  - Posting: # 17676
Views: 367

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.

[image]All the best,
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
17,199 Posts in 3,683 Threads, 1,054 registered users;
23 users online (0 registered, 23 guests).

To call the statistician after the experiment is done
may be no more than asking him to perform a postmortem examination:
he may be able to say what the experiment died of.    R.A. Fisher

BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz