Misunderstanding publication bias: editors are not blameless after all

Misunderstanding publication bias: editors are not blameless after all

In analysing whether there is an editorial bias in favour of positive studies, researchers have made implicit assumptions that are implausible. In particular, to justify the conclusion that there is no bias because observed editorial acceptance rates do not favour positive studies, the assumption that the decision to submit an article is based solely on quality would be required. If, on the oth...

Review of publication bias in studies on publication bias: here's a proposal for editors that may help reduce publication bias.

We offer a solution to this problem that lies at the disposal of journal editors. Preliminary editorial decisions could be based solely on the peer review of the introduction and methods sections of submitted papers. These two sections deal with the key issues on which editorial decisions would ideally be based: the importance of the research question and the potential for the study design and ...

Fungi are Not All “Fun-Guys” after All

The evolution of human history has greatly influenced human infectious diseases. For instance, the emergence of industrialization and the human population increase and conglomeration both directly contribute to the spread of microbes. Although the progress of medicine has helped to control infectious diseases, at the same time the advent of certain medical practices has actually favored the occ...

Publication policy or publication bias?

Although ‘‘a large number of studies have appeared in the literature that report associations of low penetrance genetic variants with disease,’’ as suggested in the recent CEBP editorial (1), hardly any of these reports have been translated into solid results by replication studies, at least for the common cancers. To some extent this is inevitable, as false-positive associations are an inheren...

Publication Bias