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

Joseph FraiettaPietro GenoveseSwim Across America, the nonprofit funding innovative clinical trials and patient-centered programs for cancer, awarded $450,000 grants to two of its beneficiaries, Alliance for Cancer Gene Therapy and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, to support the work of novel gene and base editing techniques used in advanced cancer research, including targeted therapies, immunotherapies, and cellular therapies. 
The American Association for Cancer Research-Novocure Career Development Award for Cancer Research represents a joint effort to promote and support early-career investigators who are conducting innovative research focused on Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields; intermediate frequency, low intensity, alternating electric fields that disrupt cell division in cancer cells) as well as to encourage early-career investigators to enter the TTFields research field. 
Jacquelyn Cobb
Associate Editor

Never miss an issue!

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

Login