James Coyne blog - What reviewers can do to improve the trustworthiness of psychotherapy literature

[Bob]

Very relevant to PACE.
Includes a comment by Keith Laws in comments section.


What reviewers can do to improve the trustworthiness of the psychotherapy literature.
January 14th 2016
https://jcoynester.wordpress.com/20...stworthiness-of-the-psychotherapy-literature/

Reviewers arise, we have only an untrustworthy psychotherapy literature to lose.

Psychotherapy researchers have considerable incentives to switch outcomes, hide data, and spin reports of trials to get published in prestigious journals, promote their treatments in workshops, and secures future funding. The questionable research practices that permeate psychotherapy research cannot be changed without first challenging the questionable publication practices that allow and encourage them.

 

[worldbackwards]

Includes a comment by Keith Laws in comments section.

Also potentially relevant to PACE, I thought, was today's blog from Laws:

http://keithsneuroblog.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/science-is-other-correcting.html

Here, he discusses what happened when he and other colleagues tried to correct erroneous interpretations in a paper advocating CBT for psychosis, after which they were ignored and then smeared. Eventually, some of the mistakes were admitted in correspondence, but no corrections were actually made to the paper.

A cautionary tale, given that this is what happens when you do actually have access to the data.