ScottTriGuy
Stop the harm. Start the research and treatment.
- Messages
- 1,402
- Location
- Toronto, Canada
https://www.facebook.com/MEFMActionNetwork/posts/1370214612998478
Using The Lancet's words against itself:
...
In its Retraction and Republication, The Lancet pointed out that The Committee on Publication Ethics in its guidelines and The Lancet quoted “journal editors should consider issuing a correction if a small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of an honest error)”.
The Lancet then goes on to say “So what should happen if a large portion is misleading? We believe that if many of the numerical findings in the results section change or the interpretation of the work is altered following a miscalculation or misclassification due to an honest error, republication should be considered. The corrected paper should pass peer review and editorial scrutiny once again and when republished the changes should be made transparent. Retraction and republication is a further example of correcting the scientific literature. In our opinion, it should be considered by journal editors in the interests of readers, research users, and the scientific community.”
The Lancet goes on to say “It is important to reiterate that the purpose of retractions is the correction of the scientific literature, if the findings as presented are invalid or unreliable.”
...
Using The Lancet's words against itself:
...
In its Retraction and Republication, The Lancet pointed out that The Committee on Publication Ethics in its guidelines and The Lancet quoted “journal editors should consider issuing a correction if a small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of an honest error)”.
The Lancet then goes on to say “So what should happen if a large portion is misleading? We believe that if many of the numerical findings in the results section change or the interpretation of the work is altered following a miscalculation or misclassification due to an honest error, republication should be considered. The corrected paper should pass peer review and editorial scrutiny once again and when republished the changes should be made transparent. Retraction and republication is a further example of correcting the scientific literature. In our opinion, it should be considered by journal editors in the interests of readers, research users, and the scientific community.”
The Lancet goes on to say “It is important to reiterate that the purpose of retractions is the correction of the scientific literature, if the findings as presented are invalid or unreliable.”
...