Annotated Bibliography – thathawkman

Annotated Bibliography

1.Head, M. L. “The Extent and Consequences of P-Hacking in Science.The Extent and Consequences of P-Hacking in Science. PLoS Biol, n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2016.

Background: This article analyzes the many different ways that scientific studies can be changed. From the bias of selection or the File-drawer effect and the concept of inflation (also known as p-hacking) Other methods of “unethical” methods of publishing is conducting analyses midway through experiments to decide whether to continue collecting data a, using many response variables and deciding which to report in the post-analysis and whether to include or drop outliers post analyses, excluding, combining, or splitting treatment groups post analysis stopping data exploration if an analysis yields a significant p-value manipulating the given data to see what correlatesAre false positive.

How I Used It: I derived many of the different implications and methods that scientists can use to have control over the study which should be influenced by the scientist. I also defined the many different methods and cited the article’s definition of publication bias.

2. Rosenthal, Robert. “The File Drawer Problem And Tolerance For Null Results.” Psychological Bulletin 86.3 (1979): 638-641. PsycARTICLES. Web. 15 Nov. 2016.

Background: This article delved deep into the bias known as the file Drawer problem and discussed in depth the implication that null results of studies that are not published to studies that are. Through mathematical computation, Robert Rosenthal found the ratio of how many ‘stored away’ studies it would take to make the significant data significant.

How I Used It: I primarily used this article for its analysis of the file drawer bias. I cited their definition and learned about the implications that both caused the bias and what the bias causes.

3.Aschwanden, Christie. “Science Isn’t Broken.” FiveThirtyEight. N.p., 19 Aug. 2016. Web. 15 Nov. 2016.

Background: This web article delves deep to the utilization of  p-hacking and its process. It describes the potential of how the system where scientific studies are produced can be abused and how the scientific community itself understand that there is a problem. The author also speaks about how p-hacking is not innately evil but is caused due to bias. The article then describes the process of retracting statements and analyzed the situation as a whole and what it means for the scientific community

How I Used It: I used this article for describing in depth the process of p-hacking and what it can do. I also learned about the hardships that scientists have to undergo through and how biases can easily occur. This article also gave ideas of the rebuttal, as the author described that the p-hacking should not be considered as evil

4. Nielsen, MD Bodil. “Association of Funding and Conclusions in Randomized Drug Trials.Association of Funding and Conclusions in Randomized Drug Trials. The JAMA Network, 20 Aug. 2003. Web. 01 Dec. 2016.

Background: A study that analyzed the correlation between the type of funding a study received and the influence on if it made a noticeable impact on the number of positive studies made. This study took 370 randomly selected papers that tested a pharmaceutical drug and found what type of funding it received and if the study gave a positive result. They concluded that the studies that were funded by for-profit organizations  ended up more likely to publish in favor of the drug.

How I Used It: I used this study to show the relationship between corporation funding and studies. This I showed how this relationship favors the businesses as drugs that should not be verified as beneficial are now being verified due to the corporation’s influence.

5.

Turner, Erick H. “Selective Publication of Antidepressant Trials and Its Influence on Apparent Efficacy — NEJM.New England Journal of Medicine. N.p., 17 Jan. 2008. Web. 28 Nov. 2016.

Background: A study from in 2008 when the FDA that took replication tests  for 74 studies that proved the effectiveness of numerous FDA-registered antidepressants. They retested the published antidepressants and compared their results to the published results. Overall, a majority of the replications were found to be not positive.

How I Used It: I used this study to describe how often and easy it is for untrue claims to be able to be published. This simultaneously showed the strength and potency of replication tests.

6. “Vioxx Recall – Merck and FDA.DrugWatch. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2016.

Background: This article discusses the massive controversy for the drug Vioxx, a prescription painkiller. This drug was spread as quickly as possible but was eventually found that this drug more than doubled the risk of heart attacks and death. This massive controversy brought to light the issues with the publishing system and the FDA corruption.

How I Used It: I used this article to showcase the very real and prevalent issues that bias in scientific studies can cause. This also showcases how fallible the FDA is even though it was supposed to regulate problems to prevent issues like Vioxx created.

7.Hampton, Phil. “Pressure to ‘publish or Perish’ May Discourage Innovative Research, UCLA Study Suggests.UCLA Newsroom. N.p., 08 Oct. 2015. Web. 018 Nov. 2016

Background: The web article from UCLA discussed the lack of innovation from scientific studies and how a study quantified it. The study led by Jacob Foster analyzed a database of more than 6.4 million papers and analyzed papers for 1934 to 2008. Foster found that there has been a drastic decrease in innovation overall. Then they attempt to explain why the decrease has occurred, mentioning issues such as the need to consistently publish.

How I Used It: I used this article/study to demonstrate how narrow  the options a scientist can take really take. I also used this to describe how the lack of innovation can yield even bigger issues in the future.

8.

Hutt, Peter Barton. “Untangling the Vioxx-Celebrex Controversy: A Story about Responsibility.Tran, Lan. N.p., 4 May 2005. Web. 18 Nov. 2016.

Background: A complete in- depth review of the issues the drug Vioxx had. This article lists every interaction Vioxx legally had and supplies a response for each event. It goes from the approval process how the FDA approves drugs, to Merck’s inevitable withdrawal of Vioxx

How I Used It: I used this article by explicitly describing the process of how the FDA approves a drug and how it failed to deny Vioxx with its very harmful side effects. This allowed me to refute the idea that the FDA can complete prevent the consequences of bias studies.

9.

https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/lancet-retracts-wakefield-article/

Novella, Steven. “The Lancet Retracts Andrew Wakefield’s Article « Science-Based Medicine.” The Lancet Retracts Andrew Wakefield’s Article « Science-Based Medicine. N.p., 03 Feb. 2010. Web. 25 Nov. 2016.

Background: This article talks about Andrew Wakefield’s  controversial study that there was a relation between the measles vaccination and the development of autism. There were many people authors for the study and the article discussed how they officially renounced the study due to the many implications that the test made. The journal then celebrates and discusses how the journal that originally published the study, Lancet, denounced the study.

How I Used It: I used this study to prove the point that even though a completely biased study was taken down for almost every reason possible, the study still has a large effect to this day.

10.

Altman, D. G. “The Scandal of Poor Medical Research.The Scandal of Poor Medical Research | The BMJ. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Dec. 2016.

Background: This article showcases and reasons why scientists are publishing studies that have noticeably dropped in quality.

How I Used It: This article familiarized me with the atmosphere that scientist face and the hardships that the scientists must work through in their field.

11.”Hypothesis Testing (cont…).Hypothesis Testing – Significance Levels and Rejecting or Accepting the Null Hypothesis. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Dec. 2016.

Background: This web article explained the processes of how a study is found. This explains the definitions of keywords such as null hypothesis and p-value.

How I Used It: This article was used as a reminder for the information that I previously learned.

12.

Peng, Roger. “A Simple Explanation for the Replication Crisis in Science.A Simple Explanation for the Replication Crisis in Science · Simply Statistics. N.p., 24 Aug. 2016. Web. 07 Dec. 2016.

Background: This article discussed the idea of looking at previous studies to reprove what the study accomplished and why there is a lack of them.  It discusses what these test actually can infer and its extent on previous studies. It also spoke about how it is much harder than it seems to replicate the studies perfectly as many different factors contribute to the overall data.It also mentions the lack of incentive to do these replication test

How I Used It: This article allowed me to further understand what a replication test entails for science as a whole and its limitations. Overall this article emphasized the importance of replication studies to keep and why there is a lack of them

13.

Fanelli, Daniele. “Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists’ Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data.Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists’ Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data. N.p., 21 Apr. 2010. Web. 07 Dec. 2016.

Background:This article analyzes the biases that studies faces and compares studies to calculate whether or not the pressure to publish altered the data in any way.

How I Used It: This familiarized me with many different types of biases and the atmosphere that the scientists are in. It also proved that there is a relationship, which helps my thesis.

14.

Who Pays for Science?Who Pays for Science? N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Dec. 2016.

Background: An article that explains where funding for scientific studies come from and the potential for studies to be altered due to money.

How I Used It: I used this article to understand the payment method for studies and where issues can arise at.

15.https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/as-drug-industrys-influence-over-research-grows-so-does-the-potential-for-bias/2012/11/24/bb64d596-1264-11e2-be82-c3411b7680a9_story.html

Background: This was an article that lists the negative side that pharmaceuticals have and how much influence the organizations have to get away. It lists numerous different controversy and explains the reasoning of how this power shift came to be

How I Used It: This article familiarized me with how prevalent the corruption of the pharmaceutical companies is. This article also gave me an example that I eventually used in my essay

 

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s