en
0.25
0.5
0.75
1.25
1.5
1.75
2
Scientific Integrity: Can Molecular Medicine Be Trusted
Published on Oct 02, 20124296 Views
The aim of presentaton is to allow the audience who are not likely to be expert in the PCR field, to come away with a clear understanding why there is absolutely no chance of any of the scientific da
Related categories
Chapter list
Scientific integrity: can Molecular Medicine be trusted?00:00
Aim00:34
Good news ...00:52
Research articles - 101:24
Research articles - 202:11
Research articles - 302:28
Interest in science02:45
Knowledge of science03:02
Scientists are not truthful03:16
The hidden research paper03:43
Why most published research findings are false04:09
Modern biomedical research04:27
Research publication - 105:43
Research publication - 206:10
Research publication - 306:11
Research publication - 406:24
Research publication - 506:33
Research publication - 606:48
Research publication - 706:58
Research publication - 807:17
The approach - 107:54
The approach - 209:12
The approach - 309:13
The approach - 410:12
MMR controversy10:32
Research paper published in 199811:00
MMR uptake11:25
The headlines11:56
Measles once again endemic in the United Kingdom12:36
Original article13:15
Uhlmann paper SOP - 114:46
Uhlmann paper SOP - 215:05
Uhlmann paper SOP - 315:13
Uhlmann paper SOP - 415:16
Summary of TaqMan RT-PCR and RT in situ PCR results15:30
Is measles virus present? - 116:05
Is measles virus present? - 216:05
Is measles virus present? - 316:17
Is measles virus present? - 416:33
Is measles virus present? - 516:49
Detection of MV target - 117:41
Detection of MV target - 218:21
Grapes vs Raisins - 118:44
Grapes vs Raisins - 218:56
Formalin fixation - 119:25
Formalin fixation - 219:55
Summary MV results20:29
Sequence detection system - 120:51
Sequence detection system - 221:27
Sequence detection system - 321:32
Sequence detection system - 421:55
Sequence detection system - 521:59
Sequence detection system - 622:08
Reference gene / MV F-gene22:17
Summary24:13
Detection of an infectious retrovirus, XRMV, in blood cells of patients with chronic fatigue syndrome25:03
XMRV sequences in PBMC DNA from CFS patients25:48
XMRV VP62/pcDNA3.126:26
Results26:42
Mis-information27:05
Quality of research28:04
82 journals28:53
Impact factor rankings from 1.88 to 32.229:00
Limit of analysis29:10
20 research papers per journal29:24
∼1,600 papers29:31
Online supplements - 129:57
Online supplements - 230:38
Looked at 16 parameters31:36
Result32:02
Minimal reporting32:27
The best and the worst33:36
RNA integrity IF<534:08
RNA integrity IF>5<1034:59
RNA integrity IF>1035:03
Normalisation35:16
Quantitative real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction: normalization to rRNA or single housekeeping genes is inappropriate for human tissue biopsies36:10
Reference genes - 136:21
Reference genes - 237:07
Reference genes - 337:48
Reference genes - 438:12
Use of >1RG38:44
Validated RG IF<539:05
>1 Reference gene39:16
Validated RG39:19
Negative correlation between the technical excellence of a paper and impact factor of a journal - 140:20
Negative correlation between the technical excellence of a paper and impact factor of a journal - 240:36
Retractions listed in Medline 1999-200941:00
Credibility of a published literature41:37
Why papers are retracted?43:02
Correlation between impact factor and retraction index43:45
Summary44:15
Conclusions46:34