Difference between revisions of "Resource:3758c3d9-cde3-4011-af46-4ebe9ac04d99"

From The Embassy of Good Science
 
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|Title=Reproducibility of methodology
 
|Title=Reproducibility of methodology
 
|Is About=The case focuses on editorial decision-making regarding controversial methodology and post-publication peer review. Two published articles focused on the effect of energy healing on an in-vitro model of disease. Whistleblower concerns were raised about the appropriateness and reproducibility of the energy healing methodology used.
 
|Is About=The case focuses on editorial decision-making regarding controversial methodology and post-publication peer review. Two published articles focused on the effect of energy healing on an in-vitro model of disease. Whistleblower concerns were raised about the appropriateness and reproducibility of the energy healing methodology used.
|Important For=Editors; Researcers; Peer reviewers
+
|Important For=Editors; Peer reviewers; Researchers
 
}}
 
}}
 
{{Link
 
{{Link

Latest revision as of 16:10, 18 June 2021

Cases

Reproducibility of methodology

What is this about?

The case focuses on editorial decision-making regarding controversial methodology and post-publication peer review. Two published articles focused on the effect of energy healing on an in-vitro model of disease. Whistleblower concerns were raised about the appropriateness and reproducibility of the energy healing methodology used.

For whom is this important?

Other information

Who
Virtues & Values
Good Practices & Misconduct
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.
5.1.6