en
0.25
0.5
0.75
1.25
1.5
1.75
2
Scientific Integrity: Can Molecular Medicine Be Trusted
Published on 2012-10-024303 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
Presentation
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
Conclusions46:34