Navigation group

Home banner.

Ice climbing under aurora

Where scientists empower society

Creating solutions for healthy lives on a healthy planet.

most-cited publisher

largest publisher

2.5 billion

article views and downloads

Main Content

  • Editors and reviewers
  • Collaborators

Male doctor examining petri dish at laboratory while coworker working in background

Find a journal

We have a home for your research. Our community led journals cover more than 1,500 academic disciplines and are some of the largest and most cited in their fields.

Confident young woman gesturing while teaching students in class

Submit your research

Start your submission and get more impact for your research by publishing with us.

Active senior woman concentrating while working on laptop

Author guidelines

Ready to publish? Check our author guidelines for everything you need to know about submitting, from choosing a journal and section to preparing your manuscript.

Smiling colleagues doing research over laptop computer on desk in office

Peer review

Our efficient collaborative peer review means you’ll get a decision on your manuscript in an average of 61 days.

Interior of a library with desks and bookshelves

Article publishing charges (APCs) apply to articles that are accepted for publication by our external and independent editorial boards

Group of international university students having fun studying in library, three colleagues of modern work co-working space talking and smiling while sitting at the desk table with laptop computer

Press office

Visit our press office for key media contact information, as well as Frontiers’ media kit, including our embargo policy, logos, key facts, leadership bios, and imagery.

Back view of man presenting to students at a lecture theatre

Institutional partnerships

Join more than 555 institutions around the world already benefiting from an institutional membership with Frontiers, including CERN, Max Planck Society, and the University of Oxford.

Happy senior old korean businesswoman discussing online project on laptop with african american male colleague, working together in pairs at shared workplace, analyzing electronic documents.

Publishing partnerships

Partner with Frontiers and make your society’s transition to open access a reality with our custom-built platform and publishing expertise.

Welsh Assembly debating chamber, UK.

Policy Labs

Connecting experts from business, science, and policy to strengthen the dialogue between scientific research and informed policymaking.

Smiling African American Woman Talking to Boss in Office

How we publish

All Frontiers journals are community-run and fully open access, so every research article we publish is immediately and permanently free to read.

Front view portrait of African American man wearing lab coat and raising hand asking question while sitting in audience and listening to lecture on medicine

Editor guidelines

Reviewing a manuscript? See our guidelines for everything you need to know about our peer review process.

Shaking hands. African American dark-skinned man touching hands of his light-skinned workmate in greeting gesture

Become an editor

Apply to join an editorial board and collaborate with an international team of carefully selected independent researchers.

Scientist looking at 3D rendered graphic scans from Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scanner, close up

My assignments

It’s easy to find and track your editorial assignments with our platform, 'My Frontiers' – saving you time to spend on your own research.

Photo of marine diatoms to illustrate ocean microbe biodiversity for a Frontiers in Science article on the KMAP Global Ocean Gene Catalog

Largest-ever study of ocean DNA has created essential catalog of marine life

From biotechnology innovation to tracking climate change impacts, the KMAP Global Ocean Gene Catalog 1.0 offers diverse applications for science and society.

winter kayaking in Antarctica, extreme sport adventure, people paddling on kayak near iceberg

Safeguarding peer review to ensure quality at scale

Making scientific research open has never been more important. But for research to be trusted, it must be of the highest quality. Facing an industry-wide rise in fraudulent science, Frontiers has increased its focus on safeguarding quality.

Find more inspiration and some caption examples from our social media team in the toolkit 'Brand campaign 2022' under 'Guidelines'.

Frontiers' Research Topic publishing program: pioneering the future of scientific publishing

Through our Research Topics and custom-build platform we empower leading researchers to bring together their research communities and help them communicate their research openly and more efficiently.

European flags floating in front of the European Commission Building in Brussels

To protect academic freedom, we must first define it

In September, the European Parliament Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) published a draft report on academic freedom in the EU. Frontiers welcomed the recommendations put forward. Recently, an amended version of the report was adopted.

The polar arctic Northern lights hunting aurora borealis sky star in Norway travel photographer man Svalbard in Longyearbyen city the moon mountains

Natural gas is actually migrating under permafrost, and could see methane emissions skyrocket if it escapes

Beneath Svalbard’s permafrost, millions of cubic meters of methane are trapped — and scientists have now learned that it can migrate beneath the cold seal of the permafrost and escape.

Hand of young female student in hijab pointing at drawn graph while solving equation by blackboard and explaining her actions at lesson

Does being left-handed predict heart health? Here are five Frontiers articles you won’t want to miss

At Frontiers, we bring some of the world’s best research to a global audience. But with tens of thousands of articles published each year, it’s impossible to cover all of them. Here are just five amazing papers you may have missed.

Rapid test medical pass for airline checkin during pandemic

Frontiers for Young Minds and CERN ‘SPARK’ big questions in health technology

Frontiers for Young Minds, the award-winning, open-access scientific journal for kids, has published the first articles in a new collection in collaboration with CERN, one of the world’s largest centers for scientific research.

Get the latest research updates, subscribe to our newsletter

ScienceDaily

Top Science News

  • Evolutionary Biology
  • Intelligence
  • Educational Psychology
  • Heart Disease
  • Stroke Prevention
  • Neuroscience
  • Black Holes
  • Albert Einstein
  • Quantum Physics
  • Solar System
  • Space Exploration
  • Food and Agriculture
  • Agriculture and Food
  • Spintronics Research
  • Spintronics
  • Electronics
  • Endangered Plants
  • Ancient Civilizations
  • Early Humans
  • Global Warming
  • Ecology Research
  • Ancient Retroviruses and Our Big Brains
  • Brain 'Programmed' to Learn from Those We Like
  • Targeting the Microenvironment to Heal Hearts
  • Visual Cues Inform Decision to Cooperate
  • Top Physical/Tech
  • Gravastar Inside Another Gravastar?
  • Diverse Ancient Volcanoes On Mars
  • Sustainable Chemically Synthesized Sugars
  • New Type of Magnetism: Broad Tech Implications
  • Top Environment
  • Root Microbes: Secret to a Tastier Cup of Tea
  • Early Stone Plaza Found in the Andes
  • Cultured Beef-Rice: Animal Cells in the Grains
  • Amazon Forest Approaching a Tipping Point?
  • Medical Devices
  • Chronic Illness
  • Healthy Aging
  • Patient Education and Counseling
  • Diseases and Conditions
  • Cosmetic Surgery
  • Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Pancreatic Cancer
  • Breast Cancer
  • Colon Cancer
  • Women's Health
  • Transportation Issues
  • Transportation Science
  • Urbanization
  • Mental Health
  • Consumer Behavior
  • Social Psychology
  • Child Psychology
  • Child Development
  • Health & Medicine
  • How Agent Orange Damages Brain: Alzheimer's
  • Epigenetic Clocks Reinvent How We Measure Age
  • Predicting Response of Heart Attack Patients
  • Turning Back the Clock On Photoaging Skin
  • Mind & Brain
  • Consistent Intrinsic Brain Patterns Discovered
  • Neural Circuit Mapping
  • Pancreatic Cancer Hijacks Brain-Building Protein
  • Menopause and Migraines
  • Living Well
  • When Cars Hit Pedestrians Who Gets Blamed?
  • Why Elderly Adults Lose Billions to Scams
  • Device May Help User Recall Specific Memories
  • Are You Depressed? Scents Might Help
  • Nature of Water
  • Coral Reefs
  • Marine Biology
  • CRISPR Gene Editing
  • Biotechnology and Bioengineering
  • Engineering
  • Extrasolar Planets
  • Kuiper Belt
  • Astrophysics
  • Thermodynamics
  • Quantum Computers
  • Materials Science
  • Civil Engineering
  • Engineering and Construction
  • Behavioral Science
  • Insects (including Butterflies)
  • Matter & Energy
  • First-Ever Atomic Freeze-Frame of Liquid Water
  • Diving Deeper Into Our Oceans
  • Altermagnetism Experimentally Demonstrated
  • CRISPR-Copies: Optimizing Genome Editing
  • Space & Time
  • Potentially Habitable Exoplanets
  • Migration Solves Exoplanet Puzzle
  • What Was the Early Universe Like?
  • Heat Flow in Superconductors and Neutron Stars
  • Computers & Math
  • Quantum Bits Precisely Described: Harmonics
  • The Properties of Supramolecular Polymers
  • Chiral Skyrmions in Chiral Flower-Like Obstacles
  • Darting Around With a Tiny Brain
  • Paleontology
  • Biotechnology
  • Molecular Biology
  • New Species
  • Extreme Survival
  • Beer and Wine
  • Origin of Life
  • Veterinary Medicine
  • Human Evolution
  • Anthropology
  • Environmental Policies
  • Plants & Animals
  • A Lighthouse in the Gobi Desert
  • Key Genes Linked to DNA Damage, Disease
  • Mechanisms Behind Enigmatic Shapes of Nuclei
  • Jellies as a Food Source in the Arctic Winter
  • Earth & Climate
  • More Extreme Weather On the Horizon
  • Tawny Owl's Pale Grey Color: Extreme Survival
  • Red Nets Signal 'Stop' to Insect Pests
  • Cold-Water Coral Trapped On Deep Sea Mountains
  • Fossils & Ruins
  • Neolithic Farmers in Spain 6,200 Years Ago
  • Some Pre-Roman Humans Buried With Animals
  • Genetic Ancestry of Human Found in Peat Bog
  • Early Spread of Cultural Innovations
  • Energy and the Environment
  • Energy Issues
  • Automotive and Transportation
  • Air Quality
  • Environmental Issues
  • Environmental Policy
  • Learning Disorders
  • Racial Issues
  • Borderline Personality Disorder
  • Animal Learning and Intelligence
  • Environmental Awareness
  • STEM Education
  • Racial Disparity
  • Political Science
  • Scientific Conduct
  • Educational Policy
  • Electricity
  • Privacy Issues
  • Educational Technology
  • Science & Society
  • Benefits of Heat Pumps
  • Road Features That Predict Crash Sites
  • Green Doesn't Always Mean Clean
  • Businesses Need Clarity for Mitigating Pollution
  • Education & Learning
  • Education: Early Drawing and Building Skills
  • Community Personality Types
  • How a Walk in Nature Restores Attention
  • Education: Acceptance of Climate Policies
  • Business & Industry
  • Hiring the Most Qualified: Unfair?
  • Online Reviews: Should They Be Filtered?
  • Idle Trucks to Power the Grid With Clean Energy
  • Systematic Replacement of Humans by Digital ...

ScienceDaily features breaking news about the latest discoveries in science, health, the environment, technology, and more -- from leading universities, scientific journals, and research organizations.

Visitors can browse more than 500 individual topics, grouped into 12 main sections (listed under the top navigational menu), covering: the medical sciences and health; physical sciences and technology; biological sciences and the environment; and social sciences, business and education. Headlines and summaries of relevant news stories are provided on each topic page.

Stories are posted daily, selected from press materials provided by hundreds of sources from around the world. Links to sources and relevant journal citations (where available) are included at the end of each post.

For more information about ScienceDaily, please consult the links listed at the bottom of each page.

Detail of a painting depicting the landscape of New Mexico with mountains in the distance

Explore millions of high-quality primary sources and images from around the world, including artworks, maps, photographs, and more.

Explore migration issues through a variety of media types

  • Part of The Streets are Talking: Public Forms of Creative Expression from Around the World
  • Part of The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Winter 2020)
  • Part of Cato Institute (Aug. 3, 2021)
  • Part of University of California Press
  • Part of Open: Smithsonian National Museum of African American History & Culture
  • Part of Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, Vol. 19, No. 1 (Winter 2012)
  • Part of R Street Institute (Nov. 1, 2020)
  • Part of Leuven University Press
  • Part of UN Secretary-General Papers: Ban Ki-moon (2007-2016)
  • Part of Perspectives on Terrorism, Vol. 12, No. 4 (August 2018)
  • Part of Leveraging Lives: Serbia and Illegal Tunisian Migration to Europe, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (Mar. 1, 2023)
  • Part of UCL Press

Harness the power of visual materials—explore more than 3 million images now on JSTOR.

Enhance your scholarly research with underground newspapers, magazines, and journals.

Explore collections in the arts, sciences, and literature from the world’s leading museums, archives, and scholars.

Featured Clinical Reviews

  • Screening for Atrial Fibrillation: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement JAMA Recommendation Statement January 25, 2022
  • Evaluating the Patient With a Pulmonary Nodule: A Review JAMA Review January 18, 2022

Select Your Interests

Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.

  • Academic Medicine
  • Acid Base, Electrolytes, Fluids
  • Allergy and Clinical Immunology
  • American Indian or Alaska Natives
  • Anesthesiology
  • Anticoagulation
  • Art and Images in Psychiatry
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Assisted Reproduction
  • Bleeding and Transfusion
  • Caring for the Critically Ill Patient
  • Challenges in Clinical Electrocardiography
  • Climate and Health
  • Climate Change
  • Clinical Challenge
  • Clinical Decision Support
  • Clinical Implications of Basic Neuroscience
  • Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology
  • Complementary and Alternative Medicine
  • Consensus Statements
  • Coronavirus (COVID-19)
  • Critical Care Medicine
  • Cultural Competency
  • Dental Medicine
  • Dermatology
  • Diabetes and Endocrinology
  • Diagnostic Test Interpretation
  • Drug Development
  • Electronic Health Records
  • Emergency Medicine
  • End of Life, Hospice, Palliative Care
  • Environmental Health
  • Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion
  • Facial Plastic Surgery
  • Gastroenterology and Hepatology
  • Genetics and Genomics
  • Genomics and Precision Health
  • Global Health
  • Guide to Statistics and Methods
  • Hair Disorders
  • Health Care Delivery Models
  • Health Care Economics, Insurance, Payment
  • Health Care Quality
  • Health Care Reform
  • Health Care Safety
  • Health Care Workforce
  • Health Disparities
  • Health Inequities
  • Health Policy
  • Health Systems Science
  • History of Medicine
  • Hypertension
  • Images in Neurology
  • Implementation Science
  • Infectious Diseases
  • Innovations in Health Care Delivery
  • JAMA Infographic
  • Law and Medicine
  • Leading Change
  • Less is More
  • LGBTQIA Medicine
  • Lifestyle Behaviors
  • Medical Coding
  • Medical Devices and Equipment
  • Medical Education
  • Medical Education and Training
  • Medical Journals and Publishing
  • Mobile Health and Telemedicine
  • Narrative Medicine
  • Neuroscience and Psychiatry
  • Notable Notes
  • Nutrition, Obesity, Exercise
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Occupational Health
  • Ophthalmology
  • Orthopedics
  • Otolaryngology
  • Pain Medicine
  • Palliative Care
  • Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
  • Patient Care
  • Patient Information
  • Performance Improvement
  • Performance Measures
  • Perioperative Care and Consultation
  • Pharmacoeconomics
  • Pharmacoepidemiology
  • Pharmacogenetics
  • Pharmacy and Clinical Pharmacology
  • Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
  • Physical Therapy
  • Physician Leadership
  • Population Health
  • Primary Care
  • Professional Well-being
  • Professionalism
  • Psychiatry and Behavioral Health
  • Public Health
  • Pulmonary Medicine
  • Regulatory Agencies
  • Reproductive Health
  • Research, Methods, Statistics
  • Resuscitation
  • Rheumatology
  • Risk Management
  • Scientific Discovery and the Future of Medicine
  • Shared Decision Making and Communication
  • Sleep Medicine
  • Sports Medicine
  • Stem Cell Transplantation
  • Substance Use and Addiction Medicine
  • Surgical Innovation
  • Surgical Pearls
  • Teachable Moment
  • Technology and Finance
  • The Art of JAMA
  • The Arts and Medicine
  • The Rational Clinical Examination
  • Tobacco and e-Cigarettes
  • Translational Medicine
  • Trauma and Injury
  • Treatment Adherence
  • Ultrasonography
  • Users' Guide to the Medical Literature
  • Vaccination
  • Venous Thromboembolism
  • Veterans Health
  • Women's Health
  • Workflow and Process
  • Wound Care, Infection, Healing
  • Download PDF
  • Share X Facebook Email LinkedIn
  • Permissions

Peer Review and Scientific Publication at a Crossroads : Call for Research for the 10th International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication

  • 1 Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, California
  • 2 Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
  • 3 JAMA and the JAMA Network, Chicago, Illinois
  • 4 The BMJ , London, England
  • Editorial Three Decades of Peer Review Congresses Drummond Rennie, MD; Annette Flanagin, RN, MA JAMA

The way science is assessed, published, and disseminated has markedly changed since 1986, when the launch of a new Congress focused on the science of peer review was first announced. There have been 9 International Peer Review Congresses since 1989, typically running on an every-4-year cycle, and most recently in 2022 after a 1-year delay due to the COVID-19 pandemic. 1 Here, we announce that the 10th International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication will be held in Chicago, Illinois, on September 3-5, 2025.

The congresses have been enormously productive, incentivizing and publicizing important empirical work into how science is produced, evaluated, published, and disseminated. 2 - 4 However, peer review and scientific publication are currently at a crossroads and their future more difficult than ever to predict. After decades of experience and research in these fields, we have learned a lot about a wide range of aspects of peer review and scientific publication. 2 - 5 We have accumulated a large body of empirical evidence on how systems function and how they can malfunction. There is also growing evidence on how to make peer review, publication, and dissemination processes more efficient, fair, open, transparent, reliable, and equitable. 6 - 15 Experimental randomized evaluations of peer review practices are only a small part of the literature, but their numbers have been growing since the early trials of anonymized peer review. 16 - 22 Research has revealed a rapidly growing list of biases, inefficiencies, and threats to the trustworthiness of published research, some now well recognized, others deserving of more attention. 2 , 3 Moreover, practices continue to change and diversify in response to new needs, tools, and technologies as well as the persistent “publish or perish” pressures on scientists-as-authors.

With the continued evolution of electronic platforms and tools—most recently the emergence and use of large language models and artificial intelligence (AI)—peer review and scientific publication are rapidly evolving to address new opportunities and threats. 23 , 24 Moreover, a lot of money is at stake; scientific publishing is a huge market with one of the highest profit margins among all business enterprises, and it supports a massive biomedical and broader science economy. Many stakeholders try to profit from or influence the scientific literature in ways that do not necessarily serve science or enhance its benefits to society. The number of science journal titles and articles is steadily increasing 25 ; many millions of scientists coauthor scientific papers, and perverse reward systems do not help improve the quality of this burgeoning corpus. Furthermore, principled mandates for immediate and open access to research and data may not be fully understood, accepted, or funded. Many other new, often disruptive, ideas abound on how to improve dissemination of and access to science, some more speculative, utopian, or self-serving than others. In addition, deceptive, rogue actors, such as predatory and pirate publishers, fake reviewers, and paper mills continue to threaten the integrity of peer review and scientific publication. Careful testing of the many proposals to improve peer review and publication and of interventions and processes to address threats to their integrity in a rigorous and timely manner are essential to the future of science and the scholarly publishing enterprise.

Proposed remedies for several of the problems and biases have been evaluated, 4 but many are untested or have inconclusive evidence for or against their use. New biases continue to appear (or at least to be recognized). In addition, there is tension about how exactly to correct the scientific literature, where a large share of what is published may not be replicable or is obviously false. 26 Even outright fraud may be becoming more common—or may simply be recognized and reported more frequently than before. 27 , 28

By their very nature, peer review and scientific publication practices are in a state of flux and may be unstable as they struggle to serve rapidly changing circumstances, technologies, and stakeholder needs and goals. Therefore, some unease would exist even in the absence of major perturbations, even if all the main stakeholders (authors, journals, publishers, funders) simply wanted to continue business as usual. However, the emergence of additional rapid changes further exacerbates the challenges, while also providing opportunities to improve the system at large. The COVID-19 crisis was one major quake that shook the way research is designed, conducted, evaluated, published, disseminated, and accessed. 29 , 30 Advances in AI and large language models may be another, potentially even larger, seismic force, with some viewing the challenge posed by these new developments as another hyped tempest in a teapot and others believing them to be an existential threat to truth and all of humanity. Scientific publication should fruitfully absorb this energy. 23 , 24 Research has never been needed more urgently to properly examine, test, and correct (in essence: peer review) scientific and nonscientific claims for the sake of humanity’s best interests. The premise of all Peer Review Congresses is that peer review and scientific publication must be properly examined, tested, and corrected in the same way the scientific method and its products are applied, vetted, weighted, and interpreted. 2

The range of topics on which we encourage research to be conducted, presented, and discussed at the 10th International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication expands what was covered by the 9 previous iterations of the congress ( Box ). 1 , 2 , 4 We understand that new topics may yet emerge; 2 years until September 2025 is a relatively long period, during which major changes are possible, and even likely. Therefore, we encourage research in any area of work that may be relevant to peer review and scientific publication, including novel empirical investigations of processes, biases, policies, and innovations. The congress has the ambitious goal to cover all branches and disciplines of science. It is increasingly recognized that much can be learned by comparing experiences in research and review practices across different disciplines. While biomedical sciences have had the lion’s share in empirical contributions to research on peer review in the past, we want to help correct this imbalance. Therefore, we strongly encourage the contribution of work from all scientific disciplines, including the natural and physical sciences, social sciences, psychological sciences, economics, computer science, mathematics, and new emerging disciplines. Interdisciplinary work is particularly welcome.

Topics of Interest for the 10th International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication

Efforts to avoid, manage, or account for bias in research methods, design, conduct, and reporting and interpretation

Publication and reporting bias

Bias on the part of researchers, authors, reviewers, editors, funders, commentators, influencers, disseminators, and consumers of scientific information

Interventions to address gender, race and ethnicity, geographic location, career stage, and discipline biases in peer review, publication, research dissemination, and impact

Improving and measuring diversity, equity, and inclusion of authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial board members

Motivational factors for bias related to rewards and incentives

New forms of bias introduced by wider use of large language models and other forms of artificial intelligence (AI)

Editorial and Peer Review Decision-Making

Assessment and testing of models of peer review and editorial decision-making and workflows used by journals, publishers, funders, and research disseminators

Evaluations of the quality, validity, and practicality of peer review and editorial decision-making

Challenges, new biases, and opportunities with mega-journals

Assessment of practices related to publication of special issues with guest editors

Economic and systemic evaluations of the peer review machinery and the related publishing business sector

Methods for ascertaining use of large language models and other forms of AI in authoring and peer review of scientific papers

AI in peer review and editorial decision-making

Quality assurance for reviewers, editors, and funders

Editorial policies and responsibilities

Editorial freedom and integrity

Peer review of grant proposals

Peer review of content for meetings

Editorial handling of science journalism

Role of journals as publishing venues vs peer review venues

COVID-19 pandemic and postpandemic effects

Research and Publication Ethics

Ethical concerns for researchers, authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, and funders

Authorship, contributorship, accountability, and responsibility for published material

Conflicts of interest (financial and nonfinancial)

Research and publication misconduct

Editorial nepotism or favoritism

Paper mills

Citation cartels, citejacking, and other manipulation of citations

Conflicts of interest among those who critique or criticize published research and researchers

Ethical review and approval of studies

Confidentiality considerations

Rights of research participants in scientific publication

Effects of funding and sponsorship on research and publication

Influence of external stakeholders: funders, journal owners, advertisers/sponsors, libraries, legal representatives, news media, social media, fact-checkers, technology companies, and others

Tools and software to detect wrongdoing, such as duplication, fraudulent manuscripts and reviewers, image manipulation, and submissions from paper mills

Corrections and retractions

Legal issues in peer review and correction of the literature

Evaluations of censorship in science

Intrusion of political and ideological agendas in scientific publishing

Science and scientific publication under authoritarian regimes

Improving Research Design, Conduct, and Reporting

Effectiveness of guidelines and standards designed to improve the design, conduct, and reporting of scientific studies

Evaluations of the methodological rigor of published information

Data sharing, transparency, reliability, and access

Research reanalysis, reproducibility, and replicability

Approaches for efficient and effective correction of errors

Curtailing citation and continued spread of retracted science

Innovations in best, fit-for-purpose methods and statistics, and ways to improve their appropriate use

Implementations of AI and related tools to improve research design, conduct, and reporting

Innovations to improve data and scientific display

Quality and reliability of data presentation and scientific images

Standards for multimedia and new content models for dissemination of science

Quality and effectiveness of new formats for scientific articles

Fixed articles vs evolving versions and innovations to support updating of scientific articles and reviews

Models for Peer Review and Scientific Publication

Single-anonymous, double-anonymous, collaborative, and open peer review

Pre–study conduct peer review

Open and public access

Preprints and prepublication posting and release of information

Prospective registration of research

Postpublication review, communications, and influence

Engaging statistical and other technical expertise in peer review

Evaluations of reward systems for authors, reviewers, and editors

Approaches to improve diversity, equity, and inclusion in peer review and publication

Innovations to address reviewer fatigue

Scientific information in multimedia and new media

Publication and performance metrics and usage statistics

Financial and economic models of peer-reviewed publication

Quality and influence of advertising and sponsored publication

Quality and effectiveness of content tagging, markup, and linking

Use of AI and software to improve peer review, decision-making, and dissemination of science

Practices of opportunistic, predatory, and pirate operators

Threats to scientific publication

The future of scientific publication

Dissemination of Scientific and Scholarly Information

New technologies and methods for improving the quality and efficiency of, and equitable access to, scientific information

Novel mechanisms, formats, and platforms to disseminate science

Funding and reward systems for science and scientific publication

Use of bibliometrics and alternative metrics to evaluate the quality and equitable dissemination of published science

Best practices for corrections and retracting fraudulent articles

Comparisons of and lessons from various scientific disciplines

Mapping of scientific methods and reporting practices and of meta-research across disciplines

Use and effects of social media

Misinformation and disinformation

Reporting, publishing, disseminating, and accessing science in emergency situations (pandemics, natural disasters, political turmoil, wars)

The congress is organized under the auspices of JAMA and the JAMA Network, The BMJ , and the Meta-research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS) and is guided by an international panel of advisors who represent diverse areas of science and of activities relevant to peer review and scientific publication. 4 The abstract submission site is expected to open on December 1, 2024, with an anticipated deadline for abstract submission by January 31, 2025. Announcements will appear on the congress website ( https://peerreviewcongress.org/ ). 4

Corresponding Author: John P. A. Ioannidis, MD, DSc, Stanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University, 1265 Welch Rd, MSOB X306, Stanford, CA 94305 ( [email protected] ).

Published Online: September 22, 2023. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.17607

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: All authors serve as directors or coordinators of the Peer Review Congress. Ms Flanagin reports serving as an unpaid board member for STM: International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers. Dr Bloom reports being a founder of medRxiv and a member of the Board of Managers of American Institute of Physics Publishing.

Additional Information: Drs Ioannidis and Berkwits are directors; Ms Flanagin, executive director; and Dr Bloom, European director and coordinator for the International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication.

Note: This article is being published simultaneously in The BMJ and JAMA .

See More About

Ioannidis JPA , Berkwits M , Flanagin A , Bloom T. Peer Review and Scientific Publication at a Crossroads : Call for Research for the 10th International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication . JAMA. 2023;330(13):1232–1235. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.17607

Manage citations:

© 2024

Artificial Intelligence Resource Center

Cardiology in JAMA : Read the Latest

Browse and subscribe to JAMA Network podcasts!

Others Also Liked

  • Register for email alerts with links to free full-text articles
  • Access PDFs of free articles
  • Manage your interests
  • Save searches and receive search alerts

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim
  • v.44(4); 2016 Aug

Logo of tjar

What is Scientific Research and How Can it be Done?

Scientific researches are studies that should be systematically planned before performing them. In this review, classification and description of scientific studies, planning stage randomisation and bias are explained.

Research conducted for the purpose of contributing towards science by the systematic collection, interpretation and evaluation of data and that, too, in a planned manner is called scientific research: a researcher is the one who conducts this research. The results obtained from a small group through scientific studies are socialised, and new information is revealed with respect to diagnosis, treatment and reliability of applications. The purpose of this review is to provide information about the definition, classification and methodology of scientific research.

Before beginning the scientific research, the researcher should determine the subject, do planning and specify the methodology. In the Declaration of Helsinki, it is stated that ‘the primary purpose of medical researches on volunteers is to understand the reasons, development and effects of diseases and develop protective, diagnostic and therapeutic interventions (method, operation and therapies). Even the best proven interventions should be evaluated continuously by investigations with regard to reliability, effectiveness, efficiency, accessibility and quality’ ( 1 ).

The questions, methods of response to questions and difficulties in scientific research may vary, but the design and structure are generally the same ( 2 ).

Classification of Scientific Research

Scientific research can be classified in several ways. Classification can be made according to the data collection techniques based on causality, relationship with time and the medium through which they are applied.

  • Observational
  • Experimental
  • Descriptive
  • Retrospective
  • Prospective
  • Cross-sectional
  • Social descriptive research ( 3 )

Another method is to classify the research according to its descriptive or analytical features. This review is written according to this classification method.

I. Descriptive research

  • Case series
  • Surveillance studies

II. Analytical research

  • Observational studies: cohort, case control and cross- sectional research
  • Interventional research: quasi-experimental and clinical research
  • Case Report: it is the most common type of descriptive study. It is the examination of a single case having a different quality in the society, e.g. conducting general anaesthesia in a pregnant patient with mucopolysaccharidosis.
  • Case Series: it is the description of repetitive cases having common features. For instance; case series involving interscapular pain related to neuraxial labour analgesia. Interestingly, malignant hyperthermia cases are not accepted as case series since they are rarely seen during historical development.
  • Surveillance Studies: these are the results obtained from the databases that follow and record a health problem for a certain time, e.g. the surveillance of cross-infections during anaesthesia in the intensive care unit.

Moreover, some studies may be experimental. After the researcher intervenes, the researcher waits for the result, observes and obtains data. Experimental studies are, more often, in the form of clinical trials or laboratory animal trials ( 2 ).

Analytical observational research can be classified as cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies.

Firstly, the participants are controlled with regard to the disease under investigation. Patients are excluded from the study. Healthy participants are evaluated with regard to the exposure to the effect. Then, the group (cohort) is followed-up for a sufficient period of time with respect to the occurrence of disease, and the progress of disease is studied. The risk of the healthy participants getting sick is considered an incident. In cohort studies, the risk of disease between the groups exposed and not exposed to the effect is calculated and rated. This rate is called relative risk. Relative risk indicates the strength of exposure to the effect on the disease.

Cohort research may be observational and experimental. The follow-up of patients prospectively is called a prospective cohort study . The results are obtained after the research starts. The researcher’s following-up of cohort subjects from a certain point towards the past is called a retrospective cohort study . Prospective cohort studies are more valuable than retrospective cohort studies: this is because in the former, the researcher observes and records the data. The researcher plans the study before the research and determines what data will be used. On the other hand, in retrospective studies, the research is made on recorded data: no new data can be added.

In fact, retrospective and prospective studies are not observational. They determine the relationship between the date on which the researcher has begun the study and the disease development period. The most critical disadvantage of this type of research is that if the follow-up period is long, participants may leave the study at their own behest or due to physical conditions. Cohort studies that begin after exposure and before disease development are called ambidirectional studies . Public healthcare studies generally fall within this group, e.g. lung cancer development in smokers.

  • Case-Control Studies: these studies are retrospective cohort studies. They examine the cause and effect relationship from the effect to the cause. The detection or determination of data depends on the information recorded in the past. The researcher has no control over the data ( 2 ).

Cross-sectional studies are advantageous since they can be concluded relatively quickly. It may be difficult to obtain a reliable result from such studies for rare diseases ( 2 ).

Cross-sectional studies are characterised by timing. In such studies, the exposure and result are simultaneously evaluated. While cross-sectional studies are restrictedly used in studies involving anaesthesia (since the process of exposure is limited), they can be used in studies conducted in intensive care units.

  • Quasi-Experimental Research: they are conducted in cases in which a quick result is requested and the participants or research areas cannot be randomised, e.g. giving hand-wash training and comparing the frequency of nosocomial infections before and after hand wash.
  • Clinical Research: they are prospective studies carried out with a control group for the purpose of comparing the effect and value of an intervention in a clinical case. Clinical study and research have the same meaning. Drugs, invasive interventions, medical devices and operations, diets, physical therapy and diagnostic tools are relevant in this context ( 6 ).

Clinical studies are conducted by a responsible researcher, generally a physician. In the research team, there may be other healthcare staff besides physicians. Clinical studies may be financed by healthcare institutes, drug companies, academic medical centres, volunteer groups, physicians, healthcare service providers and other individuals. They may be conducted in several places including hospitals, universities, physicians’ offices and community clinics based on the researcher’s requirements. The participants are made aware of the duration of the study before their inclusion. Clinical studies should include the evaluation of recommendations (drug, device and surgical) for the treatment of a disease, syndrome or a comparison of one or more applications; finding different ways for recognition of a disease or case and prevention of their recurrence ( 7 ).

Clinical Research

In this review, clinical research is explained in more detail since it is the most valuable study in scientific research.

Clinical research starts with forming a hypothesis. A hypothesis can be defined as a claim put forward about the value of a population parameter based on sampling. There are two types of hypotheses in statistics.

  • H 0 hypothesis is called a control or null hypothesis. It is the hypothesis put forward in research, which implies that there is no difference between the groups under consideration. If this hypothesis is rejected at the end of the study, it indicates that a difference exists between the two treatments under consideration.
  • H 1 hypothesis is called an alternative hypothesis. It is hypothesised against a null hypothesis, which implies that a difference exists between the groups under consideration. For example, consider the following hypothesis: drug A has an analgesic effect. Control or null hypothesis (H 0 ): there is no difference between drug A and placebo with regard to the analgesic effect. The alternative hypothesis (H 1 ) is applicable if a difference exists between drug A and placebo with regard to the analgesic effect.

The planning phase comes after the determination of a hypothesis. A clinical research plan is called a protocol . In a protocol, the reasons for research, number and qualities of participants, tests to be applied, study duration and what information to be gathered from the participants should be found and conformity criteria should be developed.

The selection of participant groups to be included in the study is important. Inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study for the participants should be determined. Inclusion criteria should be defined in the form of demographic characteristics (age, gender, etc.) of the participant group and the exclusion criteria as the diseases that may influence the study, age ranges, cases involving pregnancy and lactation, continuously used drugs and participants’ cooperation.

The next stage is methodology. Methodology can be grouped under subheadings, namely, the calculation of number of subjects, blinding (masking), randomisation, selection of operation to be applied, use of placebo and criteria for stopping and changing the treatment.

I. Calculation of the Number of Subjects

The entire source from which the data are obtained is called a universe or population . A small group selected from a certain universe based on certain rules and which is accepted to highly represent the universe from which it is selected is called a sample and the characteristics of the population from which the data are collected are called variables. If data is collected from the entire population, such an instance is called a parameter . Conducting a study on the sample rather than the entire population is easier and less costly. Many factors influence the determination of the sample size. Firstly, the type of variable should be determined. Variables are classified as categorical (qualitative, non-numerical) or numerical (quantitative). Individuals in categorical variables are classified according to their characteristics. Categorical variables are indicated as nominal and ordinal (ordered). In nominal variables, the application of a category depends on the researcher’s preference. For instance, a female participant can be considered first and then the male participant, or vice versa. An ordinal (ordered) variable is ordered from small to large or vice versa (e.g. ordering obese patients based on their weights-from the lightest to the heaviest or vice versa). A categorical variable may have more than one characteristic: such variables are called binary or dichotomous (e.g. a participant may be both female and obese).

If the variable has numerical (quantitative) characteristics and these characteristics cannot be categorised, then it is called a numerical variable. Numerical variables are either discrete or continuous. For example, the number of operations with spinal anaesthesia represents a discrete variable. The haemoglobin value or height represents a continuous variable.

Statistical analyses that need to be employed depend on the type of variable. The determination of variables is necessary for selecting the statistical method as well as software in SPSS. While categorical variables are presented as numbers and percentages, numerical variables are represented using measures such as mean and standard deviation. It may be necessary to use mean in categorising some cases such as the following: even though the variable is categorical (qualitative, non-numerical) when Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) is used (since a numerical value is obtained), it is classified as a numerical variable: such variables are averaged.

Clinical research is carried out on the sample and generalised to the population. Accordingly, the number of samples should be correctly determined. Different sample size formulas are used on the basis of the statistical method to be used. When the sample size increases, error probability decreases. The sample size is calculated based on the primary hypothesis. The determination of a sample size before beginning the research specifies the power of the study. Power analysis enables the acquisition of realistic results in the research, and it is used for comparing two or more clinical research methods.

Because of the difference in the formulas used in calculating power analysis and number of samples for clinical research, it facilitates the use of computer programs for making calculations.

It is necessary to know certain parameters in order to calculate the number of samples by power analysis.

  • Type-I (α) and type-II (β) error levels
  • Difference between groups (d-difference) and effect size (ES)
  • Distribution ratio of groups
  • Direction of research hypothesis (H1)

a. Type-I (α) and Type-II (β) Error (β) Levels

Two types of errors can be made while accepting or rejecting H 0 hypothesis in a hypothesis test. Type-I error (α) level is the probability of finding a difference at the end of the research when there is no difference between the two applications. In other words, it is the rejection of the hypothesis when H 0 is actually correct and it is known as α error or p value. For instance, when the size is determined, type-I error level is accepted as 0.05 or 0.01.

Another error that can be made during a hypothesis test is a type-II error. It is the acceptance of a wrongly hypothesised H 0 hypothesis. In fact, it is the probability of failing to find a difference when there is a difference between the two applications. The power of a test is the ability of that test to find a difference that actually exists. Therefore, it is related to the type-II error level.

Since the type-II error risk is expressed as β, the power of the test is defined as 1–β. When a type-II error is 0.20, the power of the test is 0.80. Type-I (α) and type-II (β) errors can be intentional. The reason to intentionally make such an error is the necessity to look at the events from the opposite perspective.

b. Difference between Groups and ES

ES is defined as the state in which statistical difference also has clinically significance: ES≥0.5 is desirable. The difference between groups is the absolute difference between the groups compared in clinical research.

c. Allocation Ratio of Groups

The allocation ratio of groups is effective in determining the number of samples. If the number of samples is desired to be determined at the lowest level, the rate should be kept as 1/1.

d. Direction of Hypothesis (H1)

The direction of hypothesis in clinical research may be one-sided or two-sided. While one-sided hypotheses hypothesis test differences in the direction of size, two-sided hypotheses hypothesis test differences without direction. The power of the test in two-sided hypotheses is lower than one-sided hypotheses.

After these four variables are determined, they are entered in the appropriate computer program and the number of samples is calculated. Statistical packaged software programs such as Statistica, NCSS and G-Power may be used for power analysis and calculating the number of samples. When the samples size is calculated, if there is a decrease in α, difference between groups, ES and number of samples, then the standard deviation increases and power decreases. The power in two-sided hypothesis is lower. It is ethically appropriate to consider the determination of sample size, particularly in animal experiments, at the beginning of the study. The phase of the study is also important in the determination of number of subjects to be included in drug studies. Usually, phase-I studies are used to determine the safety profile of a drug or product, and they are generally conducted on a few healthy volunteers. If no unacceptable toxicity is detected during phase-I studies, phase-II studies may be carried out. Phase-II studies are proof-of-concept studies conducted on a larger number (100–500) of volunteer patients. When the effectiveness of the drug or product is evident in phase-II studies, phase-III studies can be initiated. These are randomised, double-blinded, placebo or standard treatment-controlled studies. Volunteer patients are periodically followed-up with respect to the effectiveness and side effects of the drug. It can generally last 1–4 years and is valuable during licensing and releasing the drug to the general market. Then, phase-IV studies begin in which long-term safety is investigated (indication, dose, mode of application, safety, effectiveness, etc.) on thousands of volunteer patients.

II. Blinding (Masking) and Randomisation Methods

When the methodology of clinical research is prepared, precautions should be taken to prevent taking sides. For this reason, techniques such as randomisation and blinding (masking) are used. Comparative studies are the most ideal ones in clinical research.

Blinding Method

A case in which the treatments applied to participants of clinical research should be kept unknown is called the blinding method . If the participant does not know what it receives, it is called a single-blind study; if even the researcher does not know, it is called a double-blind study. When there is a probability of knowing which drug is given in the order of application, when uninformed staff administers the drug, it is called in-house blinding. In case the study drug is known in its pharmaceutical form, a double-dummy blinding test is conducted. Intravenous drug is given to one group and a placebo tablet is given to the comparison group; then, the placebo tablet is given to the group that received the intravenous drug and intravenous drug in addition to placebo tablet is given to the comparison group. In this manner, each group receives both the intravenous and tablet forms of the drug. In case a third party interested in the study is involved and it also does not know about the drug (along with the statistician), it is called third-party blinding.

Randomisation Method

The selection of patients for the study groups should be random. Randomisation methods are used for such selection, which prevent conscious or unconscious manipulations in the selection of patients ( 8 ).

No factor pertaining to the patient should provide preference of one treatment to the other during randomisation. This characteristic is the most important difference separating randomised clinical studies from prospective and synchronous studies with experimental groups. Randomisation strengthens the study design and enables the determination of reliable scientific knowledge ( 2 ).

The easiest method is simple randomisation, e.g. determination of the type of anaesthesia to be administered to a patient by tossing a coin. In this method, when the number of samples is kept high, a balanced distribution is created. When the number of samples is low, there will be an imbalance between the groups. In this case, stratification and blocking have to be added to randomisation. Stratification is the classification of patients one or more times according to prognostic features determined by the researcher and blocking is the selection of a certain number of patients for each stratification process. The number of stratification processes should be determined at the beginning of the study.

As the number of stratification processes increases, performing the study and balancing the groups become difficult. For this reason, stratification characteristics and limitations should be effectively determined at the beginning of the study. It is not mandatory for the stratifications to have equal intervals. Despite all the precautions, an imbalance might occur between the groups before beginning the research. In such circumstances, post-stratification or restandardisation may be conducted according to the prognostic factors.

The main characteristic of applying blinding (masking) and randomisation is the prevention of bias. Therefore, it is worthwhile to comprehensively examine bias at this stage.

Bias and Chicanery

While conducting clinical research, errors can be introduced voluntarily or involuntarily at a number of stages, such as design, population selection, calculating the number of samples, non-compliance with study protocol, data entry and selection of statistical method. Bias is taking sides of individuals in line with their own decisions, views and ideological preferences ( 9 ). In order for an error to lead to bias, it has to be a systematic error. Systematic errors in controlled studies generally cause the results of one group to move in a different direction as compared to the other. It has to be understood that scientific research is generally prone to errors. However, random errors (or, in other words, ‘the luck factor’-in which bias is unintended-do not lead to bias ( 10 ).

Another issue, which is different from bias, is chicanery. It is defined as voluntarily changing the interventions, results and data of patients in an unethical manner or copying data from other studies. Comparatively, bias may not be done consciously.

In case unexpected results or outliers are found while the study is analysed, if possible, such data should be re-included into the study since the complete exclusion of data from a study endangers its reliability. In such a case, evaluation needs to be made with and without outliers. It is insignificant if no difference is found. However, if there is a difference, the results with outliers are re-evaluated. If there is no error, then the outlier is included in the study (as the outlier may be a result). It should be noted that re-evaluation of data in anaesthesiology is not possible.

Statistical evaluation methods should be determined at the design stage so as not to encounter unexpected results in clinical research. The data should be evaluated before the end of the study and without entering into details in research that are time-consuming and involve several samples. This is called an interim analysis . The date of interim analysis should be determined at the beginning of the study. The purpose of making interim analysis is to prevent unnecessary cost and effort since it may be necessary to conclude the research after the interim analysis, e.g. studies in which there is no possibility to validate the hypothesis at the end or the occurrence of different side effects of the drug to be used. The accuracy of the hypothesis and number of samples are compared. Statistical significance levels in interim analysis are very important. If the data level is significant, the hypothesis is validated even if the result turns out to be insignificant after the date of the analysis.

Another important point to be considered is the necessity to conclude the participants’ treatment within the period specified in the study protocol. When the result of the study is achieved earlier and unexpected situations develop, the treatment is concluded earlier. Moreover, the participant may quit the study at its own behest, may die or unpredictable situations (e.g. pregnancy) may develop. The participant can also quit the study whenever it wants, even if the study has not ended ( 7 ).

In case the results of a study are contrary to already known or expected results, the expected quality level of the study suggesting the contradiction may be higher than the studies supporting what is known in that subject. This type of bias is called confirmation bias. The presence of well-known mechanisms and logical inference from them may create problems in the evaluation of data. This is called plausibility bias.

Another type of bias is expectation bias. If a result different from the known results has been achieved and it is against the editor’s will, it can be challenged. Bias may be introduced during the publication of studies, such as publishing only positive results, selection of study results in a way to support a view or prevention of their publication. Some editors may only publish research that extols only the positive results or results that they desire.

Bias may be introduced for advertisement or economic reasons. Economic pressure may be applied on the editor, particularly in the cases of studies involving drugs and new medical devices. This is called commercial bias.

In recent years, before beginning a study, it has been recommended to record it on the Web site www.clinicaltrials.gov for the purpose of facilitating systematic interpretation and analysis in scientific research, informing other researchers, preventing bias, provision of writing in a standard format, enhancing contribution of research results to the general literature and enabling early intervention of an institution for support. This Web site is a service of the US National Institutes of Health.

The last stage in the methodology of clinical studies is the selection of intervention to be conducted. Placebo use assumes an important place in interventions. In Latin, placebo means ‘I will be fine’. In medical literature, it refers to substances that are not curative, do not have active ingredients and have various pharmaceutical forms. Although placebos do not have active drug characteristic, they have shown effective analgesic characteristics, particularly in algology applications; further, its use prevents bias in comparative studies. If a placebo has a positive impact on a participant, it is called the placebo effect ; on the contrary, if it has a negative impact, it is called the nocebo effect . Another type of therapy that can be used in clinical research is sham application. Although a researcher does not cure the patient, the researcher may compare those who receive therapy and undergo sham. It has been seen that sham therapies also exhibit a placebo effect. In particular, sham therapies are used in acupuncture applications ( 11 ). While placebo is a substance, sham is a type of clinical application.

Ethically, the patient has to receive appropriate therapy. For this reason, if its use prevents effective treatment, it causes great problem with regard to patient health and legalities.

Before medical research is conducted with human subjects, predictable risks, drawbacks and benefits must be evaluated for individuals or groups participating in the study. Precautions must be taken for reducing the risk to a minimum level. The risks during the study should be followed, evaluated and recorded by the researcher ( 1 ).

After the methodology for a clinical study is determined, dealing with the ‘Ethics Committee’ forms the next stage. The purpose of the ethics committee is to protect the rights, safety and well-being of volunteers taking part in the clinical research, considering the scientific method and concerns of society. The ethics committee examines the studies presented in time, comprehensively and independently, with regard to ethics and science; in line with the Declaration of Helsinki and following national and international standards concerning ‘Good Clinical Practice’. The method to be followed in the formation of the ethics committee should be developed without any kind of prejudice and to examine the applications with regard to ethics and science within the framework of the ethics committee, Regulation on Clinical Trials and Good Clinical Practice ( www.iku.com ). The necessary documents to be presented to the ethics committee are research protocol, volunteer consent form, budget contract, Declaration of Helsinki, curriculum vitae of researchers, similar or explanatory literature samples, supporting institution approval certificate and patient follow-up form.

Only one sister/brother, mother, father, son/daughter and wife/husband can take charge in the same ethics committee. A rector, vice rector, dean, deputy dean, provincial healthcare director and chief physician cannot be members of the ethics committee.

Members of the ethics committee can work as researchers or coordinators in clinical research. However, during research meetings in which members of the ethics committee are researchers or coordinators, they must leave the session and they cannot sign-off on decisions. If the number of members in the ethics committee for a particular research is so high that it is impossible to take a decision, the clinical research is presented to another ethics committee in the same province. If there is no ethics committee in the same province, an ethics committee in the closest settlement is found.

Thereafter, researchers need to inform the participants using an informed consent form. This form should explain the content of clinical study, potential benefits of the study, alternatives and risks (if any). It should be easy, comprehensible, conforming to spelling rules and written in plain language understandable by the participant.

This form assists the participants in taking a decision regarding participation in the study. It should aim to protect the participants. The participant should be included in the study only after it signs the informed consent form; the participant can quit the study whenever required, even when the study has not ended ( 7 ).

Peer-review: Externally peer-reviewed.

Author Contributions: Concept - C.Ö.Ç., A.D.; Design - C.Ö.Ç.; Supervision - A.D.; Resource - C.Ö.Ç., A.D.; Materials - C.Ö.Ç., A.D.; Analysis and/or Interpretation - C.Ö.Ç., A.D.; Literature Search - C.Ö.Ç.; Writing Manuscript - C.Ö.Ç.; Critical Review - A.D.; Other - C.Ö.Ç., A.D.

Conflict of Interest: No conflict of interest was declared by the authors.

Financial Disclosure: The authors declared that this study has received no financial support.

  • All Publications
  • Priorities Magazine Spring 2018
  • The Next Plague and How Science Will Stop It
  • Priorities Magazine Winter 2018
  • Priorities Magazine Fall 2017
  • Little Black Book of Junk Science
  • Priorities Magazine Winter 2017
  • Should You Worry About Artificial Flavors Or Colors?
  • Should You Worry About Artificial Sweeteners?
  • Summer Health and Safety Tips
  • How Toxic Terrorists Scare You With Science Terms
  • Adult Immunization: The Need for Enhanced Utilization
  • Should You Worry About Salt?
  • Priorities Magazine Spring 2016
  • IARC Diesel Exhaust & Lung Cancer: An Analysis
  • Teflon and Human Health: Do the Charges Stick?
  • Helping Smokers Quit: The Science Behind Tobacco Harm Reduction
  • Irradiated Foods
  • Foods Are Not Cigarettes: Why Tobacco Lawsuits Are Not a Model for Obesity Lawsuits
  • The Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis: A Review
  • Are "Low Dose" Health Effects of Chemicals Real?
  • The Effects of Nicotine on Human Health
  • Traditional Holiday Dinner Replete with Natural Carcinogens - Even Organic Thanksgiving Dinners
  • A Primer On Dental Care: Quality and Quackery
  • Nuclear Energy and Health And the Benefits of Low-Dose Radiation Hormesis
  • Priorities in Caring for Your Children: A Primer for Parents
  • Endocrine Disrupters: A Scientific Perspective
  • Good Stories, Bad Science: A Guide for Journalists to the Health Claims of "Consumer Activist" Groups
  • A Comparison of the Health Effects of Alcohol Consumption and Tobacco Use in America
  • Moderate Alcohol Consumption and Health
  • Irradiated Foods Fifth Edition
  • Media/Contact
  • Write For Us

The Lasting Impacts of Scientific Fraud

Related articles.

research about scientific journal

Far too many scientific papers are being retracted from prestigious scientific journals because scientists fabricated or falsified data. Although no one defends scientific fraud, few recognize its long-lasting impacts on governmental policy and society.

research about scientific journal

According to a 2022 study in the Netherlands, over the last three years, one in two researchers had engaged frequently in at least one “questionable research practice,” with “not submitting or resubmitting valid negative studies for publication” being the most common practice. The fields of life and medical sciences had the highest prevalence (55.3%) of engaging in questionable practices compared to other disciplines.        

According to the Office of Research Integrity, Department of Health and Human Services, scientific fraud or research misconduct involves :

Fabrication: making up data or results and recording or reporting them. Falsification: manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record. Plagiarism: the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit. Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.

Scientific fraud can ripple across society with long-lasting consequences. Consider two: the first, Andrew Wakefield, vaccines and autism; the second, assessing cancer risk.

Vaccines and Autism

research about scientific journal

Almost immediately, epidemiologic studies were performed and published, showing no causal link between autism and the MMR vaccine. However, the Wakefield study received worldwide publicity, and MMR vaccination rates began to drop over parental concern about the link between autism and the vaccine. 

It was not until 2010, twelve years later, that the interpretation of the original data was retracted by 10 of the 12 co-authors of the study.  The retraction said, "No causal link was established between MMR vaccine and autism as the data were insufficient.” Lancet also found that Andrew Wakefield had failed to notify them that he had been funded by lawyers representing parents in lawsuits against vaccine-producing companies. Although Wakefield lost his medical license, Lancet absolved Wakefield and his colleagues from charges of scientific misconduct or ethical violations.

In 2011, an investigative journalist wrote several articles on the MMR scare. After comparing the children’s anonymized case records with what was published in the Lancet article, he determined that the data had been substantially misrepresented to give Wakefield the desired result. Thus, the MMR scare was not poorly performed science; it was a deliberate fraud.

The Wakefield MMR vaccine article will likely go down as one of the most serious frauds in scientific history. This article fueled the anti-vax movement, and even today, 26 years after the publication of the retracted article, parents still refuse vaccinations due to the fear of autism.     

Cancer Risk Assessment

Cancer risk assessment is a critical feature of environmental health and regulatory policy used by governments to determine the environmental risks of chemicals and radiation. It answers the question as to what the risk is, at the population level, of developing cancer at different exposure levels.  

Dr. Ed Calabrese has spent the last 20 years researching the historical foundations of cancer risk assessment. His work culminated in a documentary by the Health Physics Society that presents the fraudulent science behind the linear no-threshold (LNT) dose-response model adapted by practically all U.S. agencies for chemical and radiation cancer risk assessment. 

  • The linear no-threshold (LNT) model assumes that every increment of a chemical or radiation dose, no matter how small, constitutes an increased cancer risk for humans. 
  • The threshold dose-response model assumes an exposure level below which there is no increased cancer risk.

Here are a few highlights from a long history of how we got to the current state of cancer risk assessment:

After World War II, the U.S. government was on a quest to better understand the biological impacts of radiation. Hermann Muller, a U.S. radiation geneticist, claimed to be the first to produce gene mutations using high exposure to X-rays in fruit flies, for which he received the Nobel Prize in 1946. However, Muller did not actually discover gene mutations. Instead, the X-rays used in his experiments caused holes in the chromosomes (not genetic mutations). Muller finally acknowledged significant errors in his research ten years after his Nobel Prize.

Muller used his prestige and power to make the case that there is no safe dose for radiation and that the long-standing use of the threshold dose-response model should be discarded and replaced with the LNT model and to block credible research that disagreed with his findings:

  • Ernest Caspari conducted the largest and best study of that time on the chronic effects of radiation on fruit flies (1946). The study showed that there was no increase in mutations at the “low” chronic radiation dose rate (still about 100,000 times above background). This study supported the threshold, not the LNT model. Mueller ignored Caspari’s results in his papers and presentations and convinced other professors not to accept Caspari’s findings.
  • The National Academy of Sciences created the Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation (BEAR) I Genetics Panel to advise the country on these issues. The Panel, under Muller’s direction, ignored any research that did not support “his” LNT model, including a 10-year study that showed no adverse effects on 75,000 offspring of the atomic bomb survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Panel’s published findings in Science contained serious errors and misrepresentations, including altering the scientific record to mask the disagreements on risk assessment between the Panel members.
  • The Panel findings were adopted, and the LNT model became the regulatory standard for the EPA. The descendant of BEAR, the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) Committee, has issued many reports since then, clinging fervently to the LNT model despite all contrary scientific evidence.

The impact of the LNT model guiding Federal Agencies is that every questionable molecule of a chemical or radiation must be eliminated, or public health is at risk. This has resulted in billions of dollars spent to eliminate chemicals to levels that have no impact on human health and the unnecessary removal of products, many of which are critical today.

View the discussion thread.

research about scientific journal

By Susan Goldhaber MPH

Susan Goldhaber, M.P.H., is an environmental toxicologist with over 40 years’ experience working at   Federal and State agencies and in the private sector, emphasizing issues concerning chemicals in drinking water, air, and hazardous waste.  Her current focus is on translating scientific data into usable information for the public. 

Latest from Susan Goldhaber MPH :

shopify analytics tool

  • International edition
  • Australia edition
  • Europe edition

Sample of DNA being pipetted into a petri dish over genetic results

‘The situation has become appalling’: fake scientific papers push research credibility to crisis point

Last year, 10,000 sham papers had to be retracted by academic journals, but experts think this is just the tip of the iceberg

Tens of thousands of bogus research papers are being published in journals in an international scandal that is worsening every year, scientists have warned. Medical research is being compromised, drug development hindered and promising academic research jeopardised thanks to a global wave of sham science that is sweeping laboratories and universities.

Last year the annual number of papers retracted by research journals topped 10,000 for the first time. Most analysts believe the figure is only the tip of an iceberg of scientific fraud .

“The situation has become appalling,” said Professor Dorothy Bishop of Oxford University. “The level of publishing of fraudulent papers is creating serious problems for science. In many fields it is becoming difficult to build up a cumulative approach to a subject, because we lack a solid foundation of trustworthy findings. And it’s getting worse and worse.”

The startling rise in the publication of sham science papers has its roots in China, where young doctors and scientists seeking promotion were required to have published scientific papers. Shadow organisations – known as “paper mills” – began to supply fabricated work for publication in journals there.

The practice has since spread to India, Iran, Russia, former Soviet Union states and eastern Europe, with paper mills supplying ­fabricated studies to more and more journals as increasing numbers of young ­scientists try to boost their careers by claiming false research experience. In some cases, journal editors have been bribed to accept articles, while paper mills have managed to establish their own agents as guest editors who then allow reams of ­falsified work to be published.

Dr Dorothy Bishop sitting in a garden

“Editors are not fulfilling their roles properly, and peer reviewers are not doing their jobs. And some are being paid large sums of money,” said Professor Alison Avenell of Aberdeen University. “It is deeply worrying.”

The products of paper mills often look like regular articles but are based on templates in which names of genes or diseases are slotted in at random among fictitious tables and figures. Worryingly, these articles can then get incorporated into large databases used by those working on drug discovery.

Others are more bizarre and include research unrelated to a journal’s field, making it clear that no peer review has taken place in relation to that article. An example is a paper on Marxist ideology that appeared in the journal Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine . Others are distinctive because of the strange language they use, including references to “bosom peril” rather than breast cancer and “Parkinson’s ailment” rather Parkinson’s disease.

Watchdog groups – such as Retraction Watch – have tracked the problem and have noted retractions by journals that were forced to act on occasions when fabrications were uncovered. One study, by Nature , revealed that in 2013 there were just over 1,000 retractions. In 2022, the figure topped 4,000 before jumping to more than 10,000 last year.

Of this last total, more than 8,000 retracted papers had been published in journals owned by Hindawi, a subsidiary of the publisher Wiley, figures that have now forced the company to act. “We will be sunsetting the Hindawi brand and have begun to fully integrate the 200-plus Hindawi journals into Wiley’s ­portfolio,” a Wiley spokesperson told the Observer .

The spokesperson added that Wiley had now identified hundreds of fraudsters present in its portfolio of journals, as well as those who had held guest editorial roles. “We have removed them from our systems and will continue to take a proactive … approach in our efforts to clean up the scholarly record, strengthen our integrity processes and contribute to cross-industry solutions.”

But Wiley insisted it could not tackle the crisis on its own, a message echoed by other publishers, which say they are under siege from paper mills. Academics remain cautious, however. The problem is that in many countries, academics are paid according to the number of papers they have published.

“If you have growing numbers of researchers who are being strongly incentivised to publish just for the sake of publishing, while we have a growing number of journals making money from publishing the resulting articles, you have a perfect storm,” said Professor Marcus Munafo of Bristol University. “That is exactly what we have now.”

The harm done by publishing poor or fabricated research is demonstrated by the anti-parasite drug ivermectin. Early laboratory studies indicated it could be used to treat Covid-19 and it was hailed as a miracle drug. However, it was later found these studies showed clear evidence of fraud, and medical authorities have refused to back it as a treatment for Covid.

“The trouble was, ivermectin was used by anti-vaxxers to say: ‘We don’t need vaccination because we have this wonder drug,’” said Jack Wilkinson at Manchester University. “But many of the trials that underpinned those claims were not authentic.”

Wilkinson added that he and his colleagues were trying to develop protocols that researchers could apply to reveal the authenticity of studies that they might include in their own work. “Some great science came out during the pandemic, but there was an ocean of rubbish research too. We need ways to pinpoint poor data right from the start.”

The danger posed by the rise of the paper mill and fraudulent research papers was also stressed by Professor Malcolm MacLeod of Edinburgh University. “If, as a scientist, I want to check all the papers about a particular drug that might target cancers or stroke cases, it is very hard for me to avoid those that are fabricated. Scientific knowledge is being polluted by made-up material. We are facing a crisis.”

This point was backed by Bishop: “People are building careers on the back of this tidal wave of fraudulent science and could end up running scientific institutes and eventually be used by mainstream journals as reviewers and editors. Corruption is creeping into the system.”

  • Peer review and scientific publishing
  • The Observer
  • Higher education
  • Universities
  • Newspapers & magazines
  • Medical research

Most viewed

Advanced science.  Applied technology.

Home

  • SwRI scientists identify water molecules on asteroids for the first time
  • Press Releases

February 12, 2024 — Using data from the retired Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA) — a joint project of NASA and the German Space Agency at DLR — Southwest Research Institute scientists have discovered, for the first time, water molecules on the surface of an asteroid. Scientists looked at four silicate-rich asteroids using the FORCAST instrument to isolate the mid-infrared spectral signatures indicative of molecular water on two of them.

“Asteroids are leftovers from the planetary formation process, so their compositions vary depending on where they formed in the solar nebula,” said SwRI’s Dr. Anicia Arredondo, lead author of a Planetary Science Journal paper about the discovery. “Of particular interest is the distribution of water on asteroids, because that can shed light on how water was delivered to Earth.”

Anhydrous, or dry, silicate asteroids form close to the Sun while icy materials coalesce farther out. Understanding the location of asteroids and their compositions tells us how materials in the solar nebula were distributed and have evolved since formation. The distribution of water in our solar system will provide insight into the distribution of water in other solar systems and, because water is necessary for all life on Earth, will drive where to look for potential life, both in our solar system and beyond.

“We detected a feature that is unambiguously attributed to molecular water on the asteroids Iris and Massalia,” Arredondo said. “We based our research on the success of the team that found molecular water on the sunlit surface of the Moon. We thought we could use SOFIA to find this spectral signature on other bodies.”

SOFIA detected water molecules in one of the largest craters in the Moon’s southern hemisphere. Previous observations of both the Moon and asteroids had detected some form of hydrogen but could not distinguish between water and its close chemical relative, hydroxyl. Scientists detected roughly equivalent to a 12-ounce bottle of water trapped in a cubic meter of soil spread across the lunar surface, chemically bound in minerals.

“Based on the band strength of the spectral features, the abundance of water on the asteroid is consistent with that of the sunlit Moon,” Arredondo said. “Similarly, on asteroids, water can also be bound to minerals as well as adsorbed to silicate and trapped or dissolved in silicate impact glass.”

The data from two fainter asteroids, Parthenope and Melpomene, were too noisy to draw a definitive conclusion. The FORCAST instrument is apparently not sensitive enough to detect the water spectral feature if present. However, with these findings, the team is enlisting NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope, the premier infrared space telescope, to use its precise optics and superior signal-to-noise ratio to investigate more targets.

“We have conducted initial measurements for another two asteroids with Webb during cycle two,” Arredondo said. “We have another proposal in for the next cycle to look at another 30 targets. These studies will increase our understanding of the distribution of water in the solar system.”

To access the “Detection of molecular H 2 O on nominally anhydrous asteroids” paper, see DOI: 10.3847/PSJ/ad18b8

For more information, visit Planetary Science or contact  Deb Schmid , +1 210 522 2254 , Communications Department, Southwest Research Institute, 6220 Culebra Road, San Antonio, TX 78238-5166.

  • Bienvenidos

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • View all journals
  • Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts

Collection  12 March 2023

Journal Top 100 - 2022

This collection highlights our most downloaded* research papers published in 2022. Featuring authors from around the world, these papers highlight valuable research from an international community.

You can also check out the Top 100 across various subject areas here .

*Data obtained from SN Insights, which is based on Digital Science’s Dimensions.

image of abstract blue network

mRNA vaccine-induced antibodies more effective than natural immunity in neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 and its high affinity variants

  • Dominic Esposito

research about scientific journal

Cats learn the names of their friend cats in their daily lives

  • Saho Takagi
  • Atsuko Saito
  • Hika Kuroshima

research about scientific journal

Metformin administration is associated with enhanced response to transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma in type 2 diabetes patients

  • Woo Jin Jung
  • Sangmi Jang
  • Jin-Wook Kim

research about scientific journal

The impact of digital media on children’s intelligence while controlling for genetic differences in cognition and socioeconomic background

  • Bruno Sauce
  • Magnus Liebherr
  • Torkel Klingberg

research about scientific journal

Life tables of annual life expectancy and mortality for companion dogs in the United Kingdom

  • Kendy Tzu-yun Teng
  • Dave C. Brodbelt
  • Dan G. O’Neill

research about scientific journal

Bioarchaeological and palaeogenomic portrait of two Pompeians that died during the eruption of Vesuvius in 79 AD

  • Gabriele Scorrano
  • Serena Viva
  • Fabio Macciardi

research about scientific journal

Reading on a smartphone affects sigh generation, brain activity, and comprehension

  • Motoyasu Honma
  • Yuri Masaoka
  • Masahiko Izumizaki

research about scientific journal

Principal Component Analyses (PCA)-based findings in population genetic studies are highly biased and must be reevaluated

  • Eran Elhaik

research about scientific journal

The determinants of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality across countries

  • Dianna Chang
  • Kelvin Jui Keng Tan

research about scientific journal

Birdsongs alleviate anxiety and paranoia in healthy participants

  • J. Sundermann

research about scientific journal

Identification of ADS024, a newly characterized strain of Bacillus velezensis with direct Clostridiodes difficile killing and toxin degradation bio-activities

  • Michelle M. O’Donnell
  • James W. Hegarty
  • Laurent Chesnel

research about scientific journal

Multiple sclerosis genetic and non-genetic factors interact through the transient transcriptome

  • Renato Umeton
  • Gianmarco Bellucci
  • Giovanni Ristori

research about scientific journal

The effect of metformin on the survival of colorectal cancer patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

  • Zeinab Tarhini
  • Kamelia Manceur
  • Niki Christou

research about scientific journal

Chemical characterisation of the vapour emitted by an e-cigarette using a ceramic wick-based technology

  • M. Isabel Pinto

research about scientific journal

Large-magnitude (VEI ≥ 7) ‘wet’ explosive silicic eruption preserved a Lower Miocene habitat at the Ipolytarnóc Fossil Site, North Hungary

  • Dávid Karátson
  • Imre Szarvas

research about scientific journal

Far-UVC (222 nm) efficiently inactivates an airborne pathogen in a room-sized chamber

  • Waseem Hiwar
  • Kenneth Wood

research about scientific journal

Low dose aspirin associated with greater bone mineral density in older adults

  • Hongzhan Liu
  • Xungang Xiao

research about scientific journal

First direct evidence of adult European eels migrating to their breeding place in the Sargasso Sea

  • Rosalind M. Wright
  • Adam T. Piper
  • David Righton

research about scientific journal

Infections with the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant exhibit fourfold increased viral loads in the upper airways compared to Alpha or non-variants of concern

  • Christian J. H. von Wintersdorff
  • Jozef Dingemans
  • Paul H. M. Savelkoul

research about scientific journal

Inappropriate sinus tachycardia in post-COVID-19 syndrome

  • Júlia Aranyó
  • Victor Bazan
  • Roger Villuendas

research about scientific journal

The microstructure and the origin of the Venus from Willendorf

  • Gerhard W. Weber
  • Alexander Lukeneder

research about scientific journal

COVID-19 reinfections among naturally infected and vaccinated individuals

  • Sezanur Rahman
  • M. Mahfuzur Rahman
  • Mustafizur Rahman

research about scientific journal

Lockdown measures during the COVID-19 pandemic strongly impacted the circulation of respiratory pathogens in Southern China

  • Heping Wang
  • Yuejie Zheng
  • Wenjian Wang

research about scientific journal

Alzheimer’s disease large-scale gene expression portrait identifies exercise as the top theoretical treatment

  • Mason A. Hill
  • Stephen C. Gammie

research about scientific journal

COVID-19 symptoms are reduced by targeted hydration of the nose, larynx and trachea

  • Carolin Elizabeth George
  • Gerhard Scheuch
  • David A. Edwards

research about scientific journal

SARS-CoV-2 spike protein induces cognitive deficit and anxiety-like behavior in mouse via non-cell autonomous hippocampal neuronal death

  • Junyoung Oh
  • Woo-Hyun Cho
  • Sung Joong Lee

research about scientific journal

Abdominal pain patterns during COVID-19: an observational study

  • Alexandre Balaphas
  • Kyriaki Gkoufa
  • Christian Toso

research about scientific journal

Detection of human pathogenic bacteria in rectal DNA samples from Zalophus californianus in the Gulf of California, Mexico

  • Francesco Cicala
  • David Ramírez-Delgado
  • Alexei F. Licea-Navarro

research about scientific journal

Industrialised fishing nations largely contribute to floating plastic pollution in the North Pacific subtropical gyre

  • Laurent Lebreton
  • Sarah-Jeanne Royer
  • Matthias Egger

research about scientific journal

Hypertension and diabetes including their earlier stage are associated with increased risk of sudden cardiac arrest

  • Seung Young Roh
  • Young-Hoon Kim

research about scientific journal

Utility of an artificial intelligence system for classification of esophageal lesions when simulating its clinical use

  • Ayaka Tajiri
  • Ryu Ishihara
  • Tomohiro Tada

research about scientific journal

Prevalence, age of decision, and interpersonal warmth judgements of childfree adults

  • Zachary P. Neal
  • Jennifer Watling Neal

research about scientific journal

Acute and protracted abstinence from methamphetamine bidirectionally changes intrinsic excitability of indirect pathway spiny projection neurons in the dorsomedial striatum

  • Sanghoon Choi
  • Steven M. Graves

research about scientific journal

Indeterminacy of cannabis impairment and ∆ 9 -tetrahydrocannabinol (∆ 9 -THC) levels in blood and breath

  • Gregory T. Wurz
  • Michael W. DeGregorio

research about scientific journal

High rates of plasmid cotransformation in E. coli overturn the clonality myth and reveal colony development

  • Delia Tomoiaga
  • Jaclyn Bubnell
  • Paul Feinstein

research about scientific journal

Metformin sensitizes leukemic cells to cytotoxic lymphocytes by increasing expression of intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1)

  • Nerea Allende-Vega
  • Joaquin Marco Brualla
  • Martin Villalba

research about scientific journal

Incorporation of machine learning and deep neural network approaches into a remote sensing-integrated crop model for the simulation of rice growth

  • Seungtaek Jeong
  • Jong-min Yeom

research about scientific journal

Perceiving societal pressure to be happy is linked to poor well-being, especially in happy nations

  • Egon Dejonckheere
  • Joshua J. Rhee
  • Brock Bastian

research about scientific journal

The earliest Pleistocene record of a large-bodied hominin from the Levant supports two out-of-Africa dispersal events

  • Alon Barash
  • Miriam Belmaker

research about scientific journal

Generation mechanism and prediction of an observed extreme rogue wave

  • Johannes Gemmrich

research about scientific journal

Fitness tracking reveals task-specific associations between memory, mental health, and physical activity

  • Jeremy R. Manning
  • Gina M. Notaro
  • Paxton C. Fitzpatrick

Domestic dogs ( Canis familiaris ) grieve over the loss of a conspecific

  • Stefania Uccheddu
  • Lucia Ronconi
  • Federica Pirrone

research about scientific journal

Human transgenerational observations of regular smoking before puberty on fat mass in grandchildren and great-grandchildren

  • Jean Golding
  • Steve Gregory
  • Matthew Suderman

research about scientific journal

Chlamydia pneumoniae can infect the central nervous system via the olfactory and trigeminal nerves and contributes to Alzheimer’s disease risk

  • Jenny A. K. Ekberg

research about scientific journal

Oxycodone/naloxone versus tapentadol in real-world chronic non-cancer pain management: an observational and pharmacogenetic study

  • Jordi Barrachina
  • Cesar Margarit
  • Ana M. Peiró

Cooking methods are associated with inflammatory factors, renal function, and other hormones and nutritional biomarkers in older adults

  • Montserrat Rodríguez-Ayala
  • José Ramón Banegas
  • Pilar Guallar-Castillón

research about scientific journal

Classification of pig calls produced from birth to slaughter according to their emotional valence and context of production

  • Elodie F. Briefer
  • Ciara C.-R. Sypherd
  • Céline Tallet

research about scientific journal

Higher emotional awareness is associated with greater domain-general reflective tendencies

  • Michelle Persich
  • William D. S. Killgore

research about scientific journal

A large Megaraptoridae (Theropoda: Coelurosauria) from Upper Cretaceous (Maastrichtian) of Patagonia, Argentina

  • Alexis M. Aranciaga Rolando
  • Matias J. Motta
  • Fernando E. Novas

research about scientific journal

Long COVID occurrence in COVID-19 survivors

  • Aya Sugiyama
  • Junko Tanaka

research about scientific journal

Water activated disposable paper battery

  • Alexandre Poulin
  • Xavier Aeby
  • Gustav Nyström

research about scientific journal

Intestinal preservation in a birdlike dinosaur supports conservatism in digestive canal evolution among theropods

  • Yichuan Liu

research about scientific journal

Antiviral effect of cetylpyridinium chloride in mouthwash on SARS-CoV-2

  • Hirofumi Sawa

research about scientific journal

Evidence of an oceanic impact and megatsunami sedimentation in Chryse Planitia, Mars

  • J. Alexis P. Rodriguez
  • Darrel K. Robertson
  • Mario Zarroca

research about scientific journal

Curcumin and metformin synergistically modulate peripheral and central immune mechanisms of pain

  • Peththa Wadu Dasuni Wasana
  • Pasarapa Towiwat

research about scientific journal

The first occurrence of an avian-style respiratory infection in a non-avian dinosaur

  • D. Cary Woodruff
  • Ewan D. S. Wolff
  • Lawrence M. Witmer

research about scientific journal

Optimal linear estimation models predict 1400–2900 years of overlap between Homo sapiens and Neandertals prior to their disappearance from France and northern Spain

  • Igor Djakovic
  • Alastair Key
  • Marie Soressi

research about scientific journal

The influence of time on the sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 serological testing

  • Arturo Torres Ortiz
  • Fernanda Fenn Torrente
  • Louis Grandjean

research about scientific journal

Online misinformation is linked to early COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy and refusal

  • Francesco Pierri
  • Brea L. Perry
  • John Bryden

research about scientific journal

A distinct symptom pattern emerges for COVID-19 long-haul: a nationwide study

  • Melissa D. Pinto
  • Charles A. Downs
  • Natalie Lambert

research about scientific journal

SARS-CoV-2-reactive IFN-γ-producing CD4 + and CD8 + T cells in blood do not correlate with clinical severity in unvaccinated critically ill COVID-19 patients

  • Beatriz Olea
  • Eliseo Albert
  • David Navarro

research about scientific journal

Classification of 74 facial emoji’s emotional states on the valence-arousal axes

  • Gaku Kutsuzawa
  • Hiroyuki Umemura
  • Yoshiyuki Kobayashi

research about scientific journal

The emergence of a new sex-system (XX/XY 1 Y 2 ) suggests a species complex in the “monotypic” rodent Oecomys auyantepui (Rodentia, Sigmodontinae)

  • Willam Oliveira da Silva
  • Celina Coelho Rosa
  • Cleusa Yoshiko Nagamachi

research about scientific journal

Detection of COVID-19 using multimodal data from a wearable device: results from the first TemPredict Study

  • Ashley E. Mason
  • Frederick M. Hecht
  • Benjamin L. Smarr

research about scientific journal

Spinal degeneration is associated with lumbar multifidus morphology in secondary care patients with low back or leg pain

  • Jeffrey R. Cooley
  • Tue S. Jensen
  • Jeffrey J. Hebert

research about scientific journal

Phenomenology and content of the inhaled N , N -dimethyltryptamine ( N , N -DMT) experience

  • David Wyndham Lawrence
  • Robin Carhart-Harris
  • Christopher Timmermann

research about scientific journal

A gigantic bizarre marine turtle (Testudines: Chelonioidea) from the Middle Campanian (Late Cretaceous) of South-western Europe

  • Oscar Castillo-Visa
  • Àngel H. Luján
  • Albert Sellés

research about scientific journal

The first experience with fully endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy and discectomy for radiculopathy performed in Viet Duc University Hospital

  • Son Ngoc Dinh
  • Hung The Dinh

research about scientific journal

Mapping the “catscape” formed by a population of pet cats with outdoor access

  • Richard Bischof
  • Nina Rosita Hansen
  • Torbjørn Haugaasen

research about scientific journal

Investigation of humans individual differences as predictors of their animal interaction styles, focused on the domestic cat

  • Lauren R. Finka
  • Lucia Ripari
  • Marnie L. Brennan

research about scientific journal

Genesis of fecal floatation is causally linked to gut microbial colonization in mice

  • Syed Mohammed Musheer Aalam
  • Daphne Norma Crasta
  • Nagarajan Kannan

research about scientific journal

Young children’s screen time during the first COVID-19 lockdown in 12 countries

  • Christina Bergmann
  • Nevena Dimitrova
  • Nivedita Mani

research about scientific journal

Cichlids and stingrays can add and subtract ‘one’ in the number space from one to five

  • V. Schluessel

research about scientific journal

Elevated estradiol levels in frozen embryo transfer have different effects on pregnancy outcomes depending on the stage of transferred embryos

  • Liming Ruan

research about scientific journal

Group VR experiences can produce ego attenuation and connectedness comparable to psychedelics

  • David R. Glowacki
  • Rhoslyn Roebuck Williams
  • Mike Chatziapostolou

research about scientific journal

New therizinosaurid dinosaur from the marine Osoushinai Formation (Upper Cretaceous, Japan) provides insight for function and evolution of therizinosaur claws

  • Yoshitsugu Kobayashi
  • Ryuji Takasaki
  • Yoshinori Hikida

research about scientific journal

Smartphone-based ecological momentary assessment reveals mental health benefits of birdlife

  • Ryan Hammoud
  • Stefania Tognin
  • Andrea Mechelli

research about scientific journal

Long-term outcomes of cataract surgery with toric intraocular lens implantation by the type of preoperative astigmatism

  • Tetsuro Oshika
  • Shinichiro Nakano
  • Tsutomu Kaneko

research about scientific journal

Forest fire detection system using wireless sensor networks and machine learning

  • Udaya Dampage
  • Lumini Bandaranayake
  • Bathiya Jayasanka

research about scientific journal

Misinformation of COVID-19 vaccines and vaccine hesitancy

  • Sun Kyong Lee
  • Juhyung Sun
  • Shane Connelly

research about scientific journal

Deep language algorithms predict semantic comprehension from brain activity

  • Charlotte Caucheteux
  • Alexandre Gramfort
  • Jean-Rémi King

research about scientific journal

Children with autism spectrum disorder show atypical electroencephalographic response to processing contextual incongruencies

  • Amparo V. Márquez-García
  • Vasily A. Vakorin
  • Sam M. Doesburg

research about scientific journal

A generalizable one health framework for the control of zoonotic diseases

  • Ria R. Ghai
  • Ryan M. Wallace
  • Casey Barton Behravesh

research about scientific journal

HS3ST2 expression induces the cell autonomous aggregation of tau

  • M. B. Huynh
  • N. Rebergue
  • D. Papy-Garcia

research about scientific journal

Exceptional warming over the Barents area

  • Ketil Isaksen
  • Øyvind Nordli
  • Tatiana Karandasheva

research about scientific journal

A new Early Cretaceous lizard in Myanmar amber with exceptionally preserved integument

  • Andrej Čerňanský
  • Edward L. Stanley
  • Susan E. Evans

research about scientific journal

Coffee consumption and diabetic retinopathy in adults with diabetes mellitus

  • Hak Jun Lee
  • Daniel Duck-Jin Hwang

research about scientific journal

Shifts in the foraging tactics of crocodiles following invasion by toxic prey

  • Abhilasha Aiyer
  • Richard Shine
  • Georgia Ward-Fear

research about scientific journal

Production of high loading insulin nanoparticles suitable for oral delivery by spray drying and freeze drying techniques

  • Alberto Baldelli
  • Anubhav Pratap-Singh

research about scientific journal

Cable news and COVID-19 vaccine uptake

  • Matteo Pinna
  • Christoph Goessmann

research about scientific journal

Estimating the time of last drinking from blood ethyl glucuronide and ethyl sulphate concentrations

  • Zhongyuan Guo

research about scientific journal

COVID-19 infections in infants

  • Małgorzata Sobolewska-Pilarczyk
  • Maria Pokorska-Śpiewak
  • Małgorzata Pawłowska

research about scientific journal

COVID-19 increases the risk for the onset of atrial fibrillation in hospitalized patients

  • Jakob Wollborn
  • Sergey Karamnov
  • Jochen D. Muehlschlegel

research about scientific journal

Childhood temperament and adulthood personality differentially predict life outcomes

  • Amanda J. Wright
  • Joshua J. Jackson

research about scientific journal

Antivirus applied to JAR malware detection based on runtime behaviors

  • Ricardo P. Pinheiro
  • Sidney M. L. Lima
  • Wellington P. dos Santos

research about scientific journal

Therapeutic enzyme engineering using a generative neural network

  • Andrew Giessel
  • Athanasios Dousis
  • Stuart Licht

research about scientific journal

Identification of genes associated with human-canine communication in canine evolution

  • Akiko Tonoike
  • Ken-ichi Otaki
  • Miho Nagasawa

research about scientific journal

Breath chemical markers of sexual arousal in humans

  • G. Pugliese
  • J. Williams

research about scientific journal

A 5-km-thick reservoir with > 380,000 km 3 of magma within the ancient Earth's crust

  • Rais Latypov
  • Sofya Chistyakova
  • Mauritz van der Merwe

research about scientific journal

Return of large fin whale feeding aggregations to historical whaling grounds in the Southern Ocean

  • Helena Herr
  • Sacha Viquerat
  • Bettina Meyer

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

research about scientific journal

  • Skip to main content
  • Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Shots - Health News

  • Your Health
  • Treatments & Tests
  • Health Inc.
  • Public Health

Reproductive rights in America

Research at the heart of a federal case against the abortion pill has been retracted.

Selena Simmons-Duffin

Selena Simmons-Duffin

research about scientific journal

The Supreme Court will hear the case against the abortion pill mifepristone on March 26. It's part of a two-drug regimen with misoprostol for abortions in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images hide caption

The Supreme Court will hear the case against the abortion pill mifepristone on March 26. It's part of a two-drug regimen with misoprostol for abortions in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy.

A scientific paper that raised concerns about the safety of the abortion pill mifepristone was retracted by its publisher this week. The study was cited three times by a federal judge who ruled against mifepristone last spring. That case, which could limit access to mifepristone throughout the country, will soon be heard in the Supreme Court.

The now retracted study used Medicaid claims data to track E.R. visits by patients in the month after having an abortion. The study found a much higher rate of complications than similar studies that have examined abortion safety.

Sage, the publisher of the journal, retracted the study on Monday along with two other papers, explaining in a statement that "expert reviewers found that the studies demonstrate a lack of scientific rigor that invalidates or renders unreliable the authors' conclusions."

It also noted that most of the authors on the paper worked for the Charlotte Lozier Institute, the research arm of anti-abortion lobbying group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, and that one of the original peer reviewers had also worked for the Lozier Institute.

The Sage journal, Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology , published all three research articles, which are still available online along with the retraction notice. In an email to NPR, a spokesperson for Sage wrote that the process leading to the retractions "was thorough, fair, and careful."

The lead author on the paper, James Studnicki, fiercely defends his work. "Sage is targeting us because we have been successful for a long period of time," he says on a video posted online this week . He asserts that the retraction has "nothing to do with real science and has everything to do with a political assassination of science."

He says that because the study's findings have been cited in legal cases like the one challenging the abortion pill, "we have become visible – people are quoting us. And for that reason, we are dangerous, and for that reason, they want to cancel our work," Studnicki says in the video.

In an email to NPR, a spokesperson for the Charlotte Lozier Institute said that they "will be taking appropriate legal action."

Role in abortion pill legal case

Anti-abortion rights groups, including a group of doctors, sued the federal Food and Drug Administration in 2022 over the approval of mifepristone, which is part of a two-drug regimen used in most medication abortions. The pill has been on the market for over 20 years, and is used in more than half abortions nationally. The FDA stands by its research that finds adverse events from mifepristone are extremely rare.

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, the district court judge who initially ruled on the case, pointed to the now-retracted study to support the idea that the anti-abortion rights physicians suing the FDA had the right to do so. "The associations' members have standing because they allege adverse events from chemical abortion drugs can overwhelm the medical system and place 'enormous pressure and stress' on doctors during emergencies and complications," he wrote in his decision, citing Studnicki. He ruled that mifepristone should be pulled from the market nationwide, although his decision never took effect.

research about scientific journal

Matthew Kacsmaryk at his confirmation hearing for the federal bench in 2017. AP hide caption

Matthew Kacsmaryk at his confirmation hearing for the federal bench in 2017.

Kacsmaryk is a Trump appointee who was a vocal abortion opponent before becoming a federal judge.

"I don't think he would view the retraction as delegitimizing the research," says Mary Ziegler , a law professor and expert on the legal history of abortion at U.C. Davis. "There's been so much polarization about what the reality of abortion is on the right that I'm not sure how much a retraction would affect his reasoning."

Ziegler also doubts the retractions will alter much in the Supreme Court case, given its conservative majority. "We've already seen, when it comes to abortion, that the court has a propensity to look at the views of experts that support the results it wants," she says. The decision that overturned Roe v. Wade is an example, she says. "The majority [opinion] relied pretty much exclusively on scholars with some ties to pro-life activism and didn't really cite anybody else even or really even acknowledge that there was a majority scholarly position or even that there was meaningful disagreement on the subject."

In the mifepristone case, "there's a lot of supposition and speculation" in the argument about who has standing to sue, she explains. "There's a probability that people will take mifepristone and then there's a probability that they'll get complications and then there's a probability that they'll get treatment in the E.R. and then there's a probability that they'll encounter physicians with certain objections to mifepristone. So the question is, if this [retraction] knocks out one leg of the stool, does that somehow affect how the court is going to view standing? I imagine not."

It's impossible to know who will win the Supreme Court case, but Ziegler thinks that this retraction probably won't sway the outcome either way. "If the court is skeptical of standing because of all these aforementioned weaknesses, this is just more fuel to that fire," she says. "It's not as if this were an airtight case for standing and this was a potentially game-changing development."

Oral arguments for the case, Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA , are scheduled for March 26 at the Supreme Court. A decision is expected by summer. Mifepristone remains available while the legal process continues.

  • Abortion policy
  • abortion pill
  • judge matthew kacsmaryk
  • mifepristone
  • retractions
  • Abortion rights
  • Supreme Court

IMAGES

  1. Tips for Knowing a Good and Correct Scientific Journal Format

    research about scientific journal

  2. (PDF) International Journal of Recent Scientific Research

    research about scientific journal

  3. Journal of Scientific Research in Science

    research about scientific journal

  4. Scientific Journal Cover Art on Behance

    research about scientific journal

  5. (PDF) Choosing the Right Journal for a Scientific Paper

    research about scientific journal

  6. Best scientific journal covers from 2021

    research about scientific journal

VIDEO

  1. Top Tips for Writing Scientific Papers High Impact Journals

  2. Research as Scientific

  3. Secrets To Finding High-Impact Research Topics (I NEVER Revealed These Before)

  4. Scientific Research

  5. Common Types of Research Papers for Publication

  6. TIPS TO FIND ARTICLES SOURCES FOR RESEARCH SCIENTIFIC

COMMENTS

  1. ScienceDirect.com

    Volume 416 Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference Volume 231 Register now to receive recommended articles based on your activity Life Sciences Agricultural and Biological Sciences Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology Environmental Science Immunology and Microbiology Neuroscience

  2. Nature

    First published in 1869, Nature is the world's leading multidisciplinary science journal. Nature publishes the finest peer-reviewed research that drives ground-breaking discovery, and is read by ...

  3. Research articles

    Sushrut Jangi John Moyer Dominique S Michaud Article Open Access 12 Feb 2024 No additional stress of sublethal gas supersaturation in a landlocked population of Atlantic salmon ( Salmo salar)...

  4. Science

    Science is a leading outlet for scientific news, commentary, and cutting-edge research. Through its print and online incarnations, Science reaches an estimated worldwide readership of more than one million.Science's authorship is global too, and its articles consistently rank among the world's most cited research.

  5. Science

    The strength of Science and its online journal sites rests with the strengths of its community of authors, who provide cutting-edge research, incisive scientific commentary, and insights on what's important to the scientific world. To learn more about how to get published in any of our journals, visit our guide for contributors.

  6. Science Family of Journals

    Manoj Mohanan et al. Oxygen isotope ensemble reveals Earth's seawater, temperature, and carbon cycle history By Terry Isson Sofia Rauzi Thermography of the superfluid transition in a strongly interacting Fermi gas By Zhenjie Yan Parth B. Patel et al. Escarpment evolution drives the diversification of the Madagascar flora By

  7. Scientific Reports

    Scientific Reports has a 2-year impact factor of 4.6 (2022), and is the 5th most-cited journal in the world, with more than 738,000 citations in 2022*. *2023 Journal Citation Reports® Science ...

  8. Frontiers

    Frontiers for Young Minds and CERN 'SPARK' big questions in health technology. Open access publisher of peer-reviewed scientific articles across the entire spectrum of academia. Research network for academics to stay up-to-date with the latest scientific publications, events, blogs and news.

  9. Wiley Online Library

    One of the largest and most authoritative collections of online journals, books, and research resources, covering life, health, social, and physical sciences.

  10. ScienceDaily: Your source for the latest research news

    ScienceDaily: Your source for the latest research news Top Science News February 10, 2024 Mimas' Surprise: Tiny Moon of Saturn Holds Young Ocean Beneath Icy Shell Feb. 7, 2024 — Saturn's moon...

  11. JSTOR Home

    Harness the power of visual materials—explore more than 3 million images now on JSTOR. Enhance your scholarly research with underground newspapers, magazines, and journals. Explore collections in the arts, sciences, and literature from the world's leading museums, archives, and scholars. JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals ...

  12. Research

    Research | SPJ Research The Open access journal Research, published in association with CAST, publishes innovative, wide-ranging research in life sciences, physical sciences, engineering and applied science. Information for Authors Latest Articles Research Article 6 Feb 2024

  13. Scientific journal

    In academic publishing, a scientific journal is a periodical publication intended to further the progress of science, usually by sharing findings from research with readers. They are normally specialized based on discipline, with authors picking which one they send their manuscripts to. [1] Content Scientific journals

  14. Peer Review and Scientific Publication at a Crossroads: Call for

    The congress is organized under the auspices of JAMA and the JAMA Network, The BMJ, and the Meta-research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS) and is guided by an international panel of advisors who represent diverse areas of science and of activities relevant to peer review and scientific publication. 4 The abstract submission site is expected to open on December 1, 2024, with an ...

  15. Research

    science partner journals. Quick Search anywhere. Enter Search Term. Quick Search in Journals. Enter Search Term. Quick Search in Journals. Enter Search Term. ... Science; Research Article or Resource; clear all. Article Type. Research And Reviews 3439; Peer Reviewed. Yes 3439; Publication Date. 1986. 2024. Apply. Last Year 608;

  16. Latest science news, discoveries and analysis

    Find breaking science news and analysis from the world's leading research journal.

  17. About This Journal

    Launched in 2018, Research is the first journal in the Science Partner Journal (SPJ) program. Research is published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in association with Science and Technology Review Publishing House, the publishing house under the leadership of China Association for Science and Technology (CAST).

  18. Sage Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

    Subscription and open access journals from Sage, the world's leading independent academic publisher. ... & Evaluation Rheumatology Surgery Tropical Medicine Veterinary Medicine Cell Biology Clinical Biochemistry Environmental Science Life Sciences Neuroscience Pharmacology & Toxicology Biomedical Engineering Engineering ... Your gateway to ...

  19. What is Scientific Research and How Can it be Done?

    Research conducted for the purpose of contributing towards science by the systematic collection, interpretation and evaluation of data and that, too, in a planned manner is called scientific research: a researcher is the one who conducts this research. The results obtained from a small group through scientific studies are socialised, and new ...

  20. The Lasting Impacts of Scientific Fraud

    Far too many scientific papers are being retracted from prestigious scientific journals because scientists fabricated or falsified data. Although no one defends scientific fraud, few recognize its long-lasting impacts on governmental policy and society. ... The American Council on Science and Health is a research and education organization ...

  21. List of scientific journals

    PLoS One Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Proceedings of the Royal Society A Science Science Advances Scientific Reports Basic and physical sciences Archaeology Astronomy and astrophysics Astronomical Journal Astronomy and Astrophysics Astrophysical Journal Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

  22. Recent advances in geostationary satellites for inland and coastal

    Notably, most research studies have focused on Asia, suggesting unexplored opportunities globally. Advanced Himawari Imager (AHI) and Geostationary Ocean Colour Imager (GOCI) have been used to improve water quality estimates, and inherent challenges were documented, such as algorithm validation, limited spatial resolution, and high volume of ...

  23. Research articles

    Research Article (564) Science in Europe (54) Scientific Correspondence (4028) Supplement to Nature (1556) University News (195) ... About the journal. Journal Staff

  24. Scientific Research Journal (Scirj)

    Scirj, Scientific Research Journal, is a peer-reviewed open access journal that meets high quality standards by exercising peer review and editorial quality control. Scirj encourages open access and is universally accessible online journal. Scirj covers the publication of research articles from all areas of Science, art, management and technology.

  25. In Science Journals

    Research Highlights In Science Journals Madeleine Seale, Keith T. Smith , Michael A. Funk, H. Jesse, [...], and Leslie K. Ferrarelli +10 authors Authors Info & Affiliations Science 23 Nov 2023 Vol 382, Issue 6673 pp. 896 - 898 DOI: 10.1126/science.adn0009 Plant Science Seeing the light Madeleine Seale

  26. 'The situation has become appalling': fake scientific papers push

    Last year the annual number of papers retracted by research journals topped 10,000 for the first time. Most analysts believe the figure is only the tip of an iceberg of scientific fraud .

  27. SwRI scientists identify water molecules on asteroids for the first

    SOFIA's FORCAST instrument found water on dry asteroids. February 12, 2024 — Using data from the retired Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA) — a joint project of NASA and the German Space Agency at DLR — Southwest Research Institute scientists have discovered, for the first time, water molecules on the surface of an asteroid.

  28. Journal Top 100

    Kendy Tzu-yun Teng Dave C. Brodbelt Dan G. O'Neill Article Open Access 28 Apr 2022 Scientific Reports Bioarchaeological and palaeogenomic portrait of two Pompeians that died during the eruption...

  29. The abortion pill case on its way to the Supreme Court cites a

    A scientific paper that raised concerns about the safety of the abortion pill mifepristone was retracted by its publisher this week. ... The Sage journal, Health Services Research and Managerial ...