By: Layane

Layane — Wed, 23 Jan 2013 17:08:08 +0000

kiwiski,I’m sorry I’m confused as to your point. You say the frostratiun is with science as well, but then go back to talking about individual results, to my reading.The science community reports negative trials, as scientific publications; the media may chose not to, however the newspaper editor (TV producer, etc) might consider it of less interest, for example. The science community doesn’t make that call.From the point of view of the science community it’s ‘reporting the results of a trial’ that’s not about if they were negative or positive, just that you did a trial and these were the outcomes. When you’re funded to do a trial you definitely want to publish regardless of the outcome. A scientist’s career needs publications and trials are big efforts. (I’m writing about scientists at universities or research institutes.)You can quibble that negative results don’t get the same profile in the research literature in my experience (and generalising) the size [read: ‘strength’] of the trial and how important the treatment that is being trialled factor into how likely a high-profile publication will result (i.e. regardless of if the outcomes are positive for the treatment or not).Regards of this a point here is that researchers who specialise in the issue will see the lower-profile publications, but the media may not necessarily. I think people outside of science don’t appreciate just how big the scientific literature is; media report on a tiny fraction of it.

By: Hisly

Hisly — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 19:57:17 +0000

Wonderful! Who would provide me with nerd-tastic geekery, if not for you? Thanks.

Comments on: Celebrate the not-end of the world!

By: Layane

By: Hisly