From: "Hamill, Cheryl" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 09:18:21 +0800

AMGEN - editorial note from Nature - 3 May 2012

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v485/n7396/full/485041e.html

BBAYER studies

Reliability of 'new drug target' claims called into question - Nature -
05 Sep 2011

http://blogs.nature.com/news/2011/09/reliability_of_new_drug_target.html

Cheryl Hamill | Head of Department, Library and Information Services
Fremantle Hospital and Health Service | SMHS
T Block, 2nd floor, Alma Street, Fremantle WA  6959
[log in to unmask]  I
http://www.fhhs.health.wa.gov.au/library/


-----Original Message-----

From: Ari Belenkiy <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 21:43:11 -0700

>> Last year researchers at one biotech firm, Amgen, found they could
reproduce just six of 53 "landmark" studies in cancer research. Earlier,
a group at Bayer, a drug company, managed to repeat just a quarter of 67
similarly important papers.

Does anyone know the details of these results?

Ari Belenkiy

SFU
Canada


On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 5:56 AM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
> From: Ann Shumelda Okerson <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 08:53:42 -0400
>
> Of possible interest:
>
> http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21588069-scientific-research-has
> -changed-world-now-it-needs-change-itself-how-science-goes-wrong
>
> Editorial and linked article on limits of peer review,
> irreproducibility of surprisingly large proportion of published
> articles -- more fallout from the Bohannon sting?  The article notes
> that he submitted to lower-tier journals; doesn't make the open access
> correlation.