Why most research findings are false - Paper discussion on 20 October

The winning paper for the paper discussion on 20 October was 'Why most published research findings are false' by John Ioannidis. Please do join us at 1pm in Teaching Room A (Rosemary Rue Building) for an informal discussion of a controversial and thought-provoking paper.

Stats and epidemiology paper discussion - Wednesday October 20

Dear all,

This Wednesday, we plan to hold a paper discussion for the stats and
epidemiology methods seminar. If you would like to come, please take
a look at the following papers and vote here:

Doodle poll link


to choose a paper to discuss. The most popular paper will be chosen
for discussion - I will announce the results tomorrow.

1. Research Methods & Reporting: Is a subgroup effect believable?
Updating criteria to evaluate the credibility of subgroup analyses
Xin Sun et al

2. Bias in identifying and recruiting participants in cluster
randomised trials: what can be done?
S Eldridge, S Kerry, DJ Torgerson - BMJ, 200

3. Why most research findings are false
John P. A. Ioannidis

We plan to meet in Teaching Room A in the Rosemary Rue Building at 1pm
this Wednesday October 20. Everyone is welcome!

Summary of talk by Sue Mallett

Thanks to all who came for Sue's informative talk on quality in reporting for prognostic models. Her talk was based on two publications, and if you would like any further information please see the following papers:

1. Reporting methods in studies developing prognostic models in cancer: a review.
Sue Mallett, Patrick Royston, Sue Dutton, Rachel Waters, Douglas G Altman. BMC Medicine, 2010

2. Reporting performance of prognostic models in cancer: a review
Susan Mallett, Patrick Royston, Rachel Waters, Susan Dutton and Douglas G Altman. BMC Medicine 2010, 8:21

Our next session will be a paper discussion on Wednesday 20 October.