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.