Impact factor mania and publish-or-perish may have contributed to Dana-Farber retractions, experts say

Learning from past errors (and misconduct) in cancer research

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on email
Share on print

More than a decade ago, Glenn Begley and Lee Ellis published a paper with astounding findings: of 53 “landmark” studies, only six, or 11%, were reproducible, even with the same reagents and the same protocols—and even, sometimes, in the same laboratory—as the original study.

To access this subscriber-only content please log in or subscribe.

If your institution has a site license, log in with IP-login or register for a sponsored account.*
*Not all site licenses are enrolled in sponsored accounts.

Login Subscribe
Jacquelyn Cobb
Associate Editor
Table of Contents

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

From left to right: Geoffrey Shapiro, Leif Ellisen and Nancy Lin. Sitting below them is Kornelia Polyak.The Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center,  a cancer research consortium comprised of five of Boston’s academic medical centers, including Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Massachusetts General Hospital, has been awarded an NCI grant to continue its Specialized Program of Research Excellence in Breast Cancer.
Jacquelyn Cobb
Associate Editor

Never miss an issue!

Get alerts for our award-winning coverage in your inbox.

Login