{"id":1272,"date":"2019-07-24T21:39:32","date_gmt":"2019-07-24T21:39:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/stealthsyndromesstudy.com\/?p=1272"},"modified":"2023-06-26T21:35:12","modified_gmt":"2023-06-26T21:35:12","slug":"revised-stealth-syndromes-human-study-protocol-appendix-1-reproducibility","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.stealthsyndromesstudy.com\/?p=1272","title":{"rendered":"Revised Stealth Syndromes Human Study Protocol: APPENDIX 1 – Reproducibility"},"content":{"rendered":"

REPRODUCIBILITY <\/strong>– THE SCIENTIFIC PROBLEM THAT DEMANDED ENHANCED SOURCING OF THE STUDY DIET<\/em><\/p>\n

Reproducibility + Confounding factors drive changes, increase complexity, & costs<\/strong><\/p>\n

Reproducibility is the acid test of properly done studies that produce valid data. In the past couple of years, the “reproducibility crisis” has been the subject of numerous scholarly articles and comments.<\/p>\n

\n

This ad-free article is made possible by the financial support of the<\/em>
\nCenter for Research on Environmental Chemicals in Humans:<\/a>\u00a0a 501(c)(3) non-profit.<\/em>
\nPlease consider making a\u00a0tax-deductible donation<\/a>\u00a0for continued biomedical research.<\/p>\n

\n

The most data-based is this one from Nature (1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility Survey sheds light on the \u2018crisis\u2019 rocking research.<\/a><\/u>).<\/p>\n

That article found that: “More than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist’s experiments, and more than half have failed to reproduce their own experiments.”<\/p>\n

While data do not indicate a substantial rise in irreproducible results, the persistence of non-replicable studies is unacceptable. We should not add to that phenomenon.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

See also:<\/p>\n