Tag Archives: peer review
Unisciti a 2.628 altri iscritti
Follow MEDEST on Twitter
- The MEDEST118 Daily is out! paper.li/MEDEST118/1407… Stories via @ApoThera @TheResusRoom @H2OhTwist #foamed #medtwitter 4 hours ago
- RT @airwayGladiator: #AAF23 AMSTERDAM AIRWAY FESTIVAL 10-17 June 2023. @AirwayMxAcademy @jducanto @DaveOlvera1 @rosshofmeyr @EAMSAirway @bo… 12 hours ago
- The MEDEST118 Daily is out! paper.li/MEDEST118/1407… Stories via @Goli_Bot @insurancegold1 @First10EM #foamed #medical 1 day ago
- The MEDEST118 Daily is out! paper.li/MEDEST118/1407… Stories via @TheObGProject @TheSGEM @vebinars #foamed #meded 2 days ago
- RT @MEDEST118: Don't live me Breathless medest118.com/2023/01/28/don… via @MEDEST118 2 days ago
Articoli recenti
- Don’t live me Breathless 28 gennaio 2023
- Beyond Guidelines: what’s new in OCHA management 6 settembre 2022
- In case of oesophageal intubation 19 agosto 2022
- 2 Minutes Advanced Airways 14 febbraio 2022
- There is a crazy guy on the street! 10 gennaio 2022
- Hot off the press. My favourite 2021 Articles 1 gennaio 2022
- Fuori binario. Consapevolezza della diversità ed elogio della soggettività in Medicina d’Urgenza “street level” 26 giugno 2021
Archivi
MyTweet
- The MEDEST118 Daily is out! paper.li/MEDEST118/1407… Stories via @ApoThera @TheResusRoom @H2OhTwist #foamed #medtwitter 4 hours ago
- RT @airwayGladiator: #AAF23 AMSTERDAM AIRWAY FESTIVAL 10-17 June 2023. @AirwayMxAcademy @jducanto @DaveOlvera1 @rosshofmeyr @EAMSAirway @bo… 12 hours ago
- The MEDEST118 Daily is out! paper.li/MEDEST118/1407… Stories via @Goli_Bot @insurancegold1 @First10EM #foamed #medical 1 day ago
- The MEDEST118 Daily is out! paper.li/MEDEST118/1407… Stories via @TheObGProject @TheSGEM @vebinars #foamed #meded 2 days ago
- RT @MEDEST118: Don't live me Breathless medest118.com/2023/01/28/don… via @MEDEST118 2 days ago
- Don't live me Breathless medest118.com/2023/01/28/don… via @MEDEST118 2 days ago
Favourites FOAMED Blogs
- CriticalCareNow
- Emergenza-Urgenza 2.0
- ALL Ohio EM
- Triggerlab
- thinking critical care
- urgentcareultrasound
- MariaLuisaRuberto.com
- Critical Care Northampton
- OHCA research
- SonoStuff
- phemcast
- First10EM
- Songs or Stories
- airwayNautics
- resusNautics
- Life in the Fast Lane • LITFL
- emDOCs.net - Emergency Medicine Education
- The Collective
- Dave on Airways
- FOAMcast
- Broome Docs
- St.Emlyn's
- BoringEM
- "CardioOnline"Basic and Advanced Cardiovascular medicine" Cariology" concepts and Review -Dr.Nabil Paktin,MD.FACC.دکتـور نبــــیل "پاکطــــین
- DOWNSTAIRS CARE OUT THERE BLOG
- EmergencyPedia
- Little Medic
- Prehospital and Retrieval Medicine - THE PHARM dedicated to the memory of Dr John Hinds
- Prehospital Emergency Medicine Blog
- Italy Customized Tour Operator in Florence
- GoogleFOAM/FOAMSearch
- EM Lyceum
- Pediatric EM Morsels
- KidsCareEverywhere
- EM Pills
- AmboFOAM
- Rural Doctors Net
- Auckland HEMS
- ECHOARTE
- MEDEST
- EM Basic
- KI Doc
- Emergency Live
- AMP EM
- www.podcastingformedicalprofessionals.com
- Academic Life in Emergency Medicine
- Comments on: Homepage
- Greater Sydney Area HEMS
Scrivi a MEDEST
Le tue opinioni sono il nostro valore aggiunto!
Is the Peer Review Journal Dead?
28 GiuUna disamina realistica e crudele sullo stato attuale della stampa e della ricerca in ambito medico.
Tony Brown, editore di Emergency Medicine Australasia, dipinge un quadro devastante sulla qualità delle riviste mediche, evidenziando in modo sistematico una serie di problemi che non possiamo fare finta di non vedere. Questo podcast vi farà cambiare atteggiamento nei confronti di molte delle fonti che giornalmente costruiscono la nostra base culturale. Aumenterà sicuramente la consapevole autodifesa contro articoli faziosi e di poca consistenza scientifica.
Ascoltate l’audio, leggete le slide. In calce al post gli highlights della presentazione. Sono in lingua originale per evitare di perdere con la traduzione la vera natura dei concetti.
Highlights Transcript:
Peer review dosen’t work
Peer review: “Slow, expensive, ineffective, a lottery, biased, incapable of detecting fraud and prone to abuse” Smith R. BMJ 2004;329:242-4
Most papers are rubbish
Few trials are valid and relevant ( 1% – 7% ) Haynes RB. ACP J Club 1993;119:A22-A23 Scott I, Glaziou P. Med J Aust 2012;197:374-8
Research hijacked (from Big Pharma)
Big Pharma owns and control the data
Big Pharma control what is published or not
Restricted full-text access
$24 billion biomedical publishing industry
Most of them are waste of money
Positive studies are most likely been published, so authors try hard to make positive conclusions trough subanalysys of small groups invalidating all data
Negative studies are most likely to be rigorous and well conducted
What are the alternatives?
Release ALL data and information
Publish negative trials
Focus on the reader
Post publication review, ‘Publish then filter’
Rating systems / Web 2.0 tools / crowdsourcing
Is the Peer Review Journal Dead? Not yet – but smelling badly !
Return the focus back onto the reader
Expect and embrace all forms of post publication review
Focus on education / translation
Must read books:
Bad Pharma by Ben Goldacre (Google Books)
Richard Smith: Is the pharmaceutical industry like the mafia?
Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime by Peter Gotzcshe (Google Books)
The Truth About The Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us by Marcia Angell (Google Books)
Condividi:
Mi piace:
Tag:Big Pharma, peer review