Discussion: Why "An estimate of the science-wise false discovery rate and application to the top medical literature" is false

Raise standards for preclinical cancer research

(2012) C. Glenn Begley et al.   NATURE

The False-positive to False-negative Ratio in Epidemiologic Studies

(2011) John P. A. Ioannidis et al.   EPIDEMIOLOGY

Magnitude of effects in clinical trials published in high-impact general medical journals

(2011) Konstantinos CM Siontis et al.   INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY

Believe it or not: how much can we rely on published data on potential drug targets?

(2011) Florian Prinz et al.   NATURE REVIEWS DRUG DISCOVERY

Quantifying Selective Reporting and the Proteus Phenomenon for Multiple Datasets with Similar Bias

(2011) Thomas Pfeiffer et al.   PLoS One

Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries

(2011) Daniele Fanelli   SCIENTOMETRICS

Reporting and Interpretation of Randomized Controlled Trials With Statistically Nonsignificant Results for Primary Outcomes

(2010) Isabelle Boutron   JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION

“Positive” Results Increase Down the Hierarchy of the Sciences

(2010) Daniele Fanelli   PLoS One

Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists' Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data

(2010) Daniele Fanelli   PLoS One

Evaluation of the Potential Excess of Statistically Significant Findings in Published Genetic Association Studies: Application to Alzheimer's Disease

(2008) Fotini K. Kavvoura et al.   AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY

Why Most Discovered True Associations Are Inflated

(2008) John P. A. Ioannidis   EPIDEMIOLOGY