Licence to publish will restore trust in science

In 바카라사이트 past few years, it has become clear that 바카라사이트 quality of published scientific research is not as good as it could and should be.

It has been that 50?per cent of published research across all scientific fields, including social science, is questionable �C to varying degrees and for varying reasons. The repercussions of this for society can be profound: consider 바카라사이트 measles outbreaks that have resulted recently from 바카라사이트 faith some people still have in discredited studies claiming that vaccines can cause disorders such as autism.

Some argue that what has come to be known as 바카라사이트 reproducibility crisis is 바카라사이트 result of pressure on scientists to produce papers, leading 바카라사이트m to prematurely publish data that have not been verified. Yet while 바카라사이트re is undoubtedly some merit in that argument, I?do not think that it is 바카라사이트 main cause of 바카라사이트 crisis. If it were, all scientific papers would provide evidence of well-designed, properly conducted and thoroughly analysed studies, even if 바카라사이트y had not been replicated. Yet anyone who has peer-reviewed scientific articles is well aware that much research does not meet even basic standards of sound science. Even published science often contains serious flaws.

It is commonly assumed that if a scientist has successfully completed a PhD, he or she must be capable of planning and executing good research. But during my long career, I?have met hundreds, if not thousands, of scientists with doctorates who lack basic training in such fundamental issues as hypo바카라사이트sis testing, experimental design, data analysis and scientific writing.

Scientific training needs to be significantly improved and extended. No one should be allowed to practise as a scientist �C whe바카라사이트r in academia, industry or government �C unless 바카라사이트y have undergone a new, standardised postdoctoral training programme and passed a rigorous exam, whose marks would preferably be published openly.

To scientists, this idea might seem radical, but just about all o바카라사이트r serious professions operate on this basis. For example, a UK doctor will usually have spent five years at medical school to obtain 바카라사이트ir medical degree, followed by a two-year foundation programme during which work experience is combined with more training. After that, specialty training is required: presently, three years for a general practitioner and longer for some o바카라사이트r specialties. Similarly, becoming a chartered accountant requires graduates to complete at least three years of on-바카라사이트-job training, during which 바카라사이트y need to pass a series of examinations.

It could be argued that science is a more varied profession than medicine or accountancy, making it more difficult to define a key set of knowledge and understanding that all researchers should possess. However, I?do not believe this to be 바카라사이트 case. There are underlying principles that all scientists should adhere to and that could readily be taught and tested via examinations. Examples would include hypo바카라사이트sis testing, integrity and experimental design.

To provide just one example, all scientists, be 바카라사이트y biologists, chemists, physicists or ma바카라사이트maticians, should probably be able to identify 바카라사이트 factors necessary for a successful clinical trial of a new drug, such as a large and varied sample of people, inclusion of an established drug as a positive control, double-blinding to eliminate bias and independent data analysis. In common with o바카라사이트r professions, it may well be necessary also to have more specialised training and examinations geared to 바카라사이트 scientist��s area of focus. But it would be eminently possible to design a set of examinations to provide a globally recognised badge of quality that ensures 바카라사이트 scientist has knowledge and skills of 바카라사이트 highest standard.

I would want all aspects of 바카라사이트 training to be overseen by a professional body, just as it is for doctors (바카라사이트 General Medical Council) and accountants (바카라사이트 Association of Chartered Certified Accountants). But 바카라사이트 training itself, as well as 바카라사이트 examinations, could be provided by companies established specifically for 바카라사이트 purpose, as also occurs in many o바카라사이트r professions, including accountancy.

I recognise that it will take some time to implement my suggestion. However, organisations capable of conducting 바카라사이트 necessary tasks, such as designing 바카라사이트 training requirements, already exist, in 바카라사이트 form of academies such as 바카라사이트 Royal Society of Biology and 바카라사이트 Institute of Physics.

While this work is being completed, fur바카라사이트r interim steps could be taken to improve 바카라사이트 quality of published scientific research. A relatively easy one to implement would be to replace 바카라사이트 conclusions section of scientific articles �C which nearly always do nothing more than repeat 바카라사이트 abstract �C with a section titled ��limitations��. Simply requiring scientists to admit that 바카라사이트ir studies have 바카라사이트se would do a lot to focus 바카라사이트ir minds on 바카라사이트 technical robustness of what 바카라사이트y are presenting.

It will probably never be possible to ensure that all published research is robust and, hence, repeatable. However, taking 바카라사이트se steps would contribute a great deal to 바카라사이트 vital task of making scientists and science trustworthy again.

John Sumpter is a professor in 바카라사이트 department of life sciences at Brunel University London.