### SlideShare for iOS

by Linkedin Corporation

FREE - On the App Store

Question everything! Louise cullen examines the minefield of published research and importance of reading around topics, not articles.

Question everything! Louise cullen examines the minefield of published research and importance of reading around topics, not articles.

- Total Views
- 525
- Views on SlideShare
- 248
- Embed Views

- Likes
- 2
- Downloads
- 4
- Comments
- 0

http://intensivecarenetwork.com | 276 |

https://twitter.com | 1 |

Uploaded via SlideShare as Microsoft PowerPoint

© All Rights Reserved

- 1. “Why most published research is wrong.” Louise Cullen (Clinician researcher)
- 2. Disclosure Information
- 3. “It is everyone’s responsibility to find out how to ask questions systematically, find answers from searching the literature, critically appraise the literature and apply the results to practice.” Rinaldo Bellomo
- 4. “It is everyone’s responsibility to find out how to ask questions systematically, find answers from searching the literature, critically appraise the literature and apply the results to practice.” Rinaldo Bellomo
- 5. 40 ingredients associate with cancer Most single studies showed implausibly large effects.
- 6. The p value
- 7. The p value Observed size of Effect
- 8. p=0.01
- 9. p=0.01 There is a 1% chance of results as extreme as these would occur when there is really no difference occurring in the experiment.
- 10. 1000 hypotheses
- 11. Replication of studies
- 12. Replication of studies
- 13. Problems with the study itself.
- 14. Wrong question
- 15. Wrong Theory
- 16. Wrong population studied
- 17. 2 ACS: Trial and community populations Circulation. 115(19):2549-69, 2007 May 15.
- 18. n=2
- 19. Wrong design
- 20. • Greater the flexibility in – designs – definitions – outcomes – analytical modes
- 21. • Greater the flexibility in – designs – definitions – outcomes – analytical modes • Hotter a scientific field with more teams involved.
- 22. Wrong Endpoints
- 23. Ad and high dose Ad Ca++ in cardiac arrest COX-2 inhibitors Milrinone
- 24. Methodology Statistical hypothesis inference testing
- 25. Problems with reporting
- 26. Interpretation
- 27. • “a little significance” • “a definite trend is evident” • “a clear tendency” • “almost achieved significance”
- 28. • “a little significance” • “a definite trend is evident” • “a clear tendency” • “almost achieved significance” The data is practically meaningless
- 29. • “In my experience” • “In case after case” • “In a series of cases” • “It is generally believed that..” • “A highly significant area for exploratory study” • Once • Twice • Three times • A couple of others think so too • A totally useless topic in my underpowered study…….
- 30. Omitting facts deliberately ….!
- 31. Why? Incentives
- 32. Pharma
- 33. Pharma
- 34. Why? Ethical practice of researchers
- 35. Problems with publishing
- 36. Don’t believe in the review process
- 37. Journal publishing practices
- 38. • 2004 “original articles” in NEJM – 363 tested an established therapy – 146 (40%) reversed that practice – 138 (38%) reaffirmed it
- 39. What can you do about it?
- 40. Read more than the title!
- 41. Reporting Framework CONSORT (http://bit.ly/14qUNEF) – Standards for reporting of trials STARD – Standards for the Reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies
- 42. Biases
- 43. Be sceptical!
- 44. Thank you @louiseacullen

Full NameComment goes here.Mario Rugna, Emergency Physician at 118 Firenze Soccorso 3 months agoГарри Слободянюк, lekar anesteziolog at Nemocnica s Poliklinikou Revuca Slovakia 3 months ago