Badscience.net Website Review

evidence to house of commons sci tech select committee on research integrity. sorry not to be in regular blogging mode at the moment. here’s a video of our evidence session to parliament, where they are running an inquiry into research integrity. i think clinical trials are the best possible way to approach this issue. lots of things in “research integrity” are hard to capture in hard logical rules,  so you end up with waffly “concordats” and rules that are applied inconsistently. with clinical trials you can make clear rules, you can measure compliance, and you can enforce compliance. there is lots of chat about this in the video below from 17:37 with me, simon read the rest of this entry ». how do the world’s biggest drug companies compare, in their transparency commitments? world, to compare their public commitments on trials transparency. regular readers will be familiar with this ongoing battle but the results of clinical trials are being routinely and legally withheld from doctors, researchers, and patients. this is a problem across some fascinating patterns. while companies superficially have commitments to register and report clinical trials, in reality, there are often huge gaps in their policies, with many failing to include past trials (trials on the medicines we use today) and trials on are good for: identify who’s doing well, and who’s doing badly, so that everyone can learn from the best players. lastly, as we went along we collected some fascinating examples of problematic policies, ambiguous language, inconsistent commitments, odd exclusions, and so overall this audit was a huge project, and we hope it will be widely used. you can see which companies are the best, and the worst. if determine whether a company are breaching their commitments. if you’re an ethical investor (at the alltrials data more accessible. we think this is an important aspect of communicating results and making them useful, and used, and we’re