R help - Apr 2013 - OFFTOPIC: Ioannidis et. al. on non-reproducible research

**** OFFTOPIC ****

These links were sent to me by a friend and are kind of a followup to
Sarah Goslee's recent off topic post on the Rogoff Excel spreadsheet
goof, which I appreciated, that I hope will be of interest to this
list's readers. I apologize if I have taken too much license.  I will
also crosspost it to stackexchange, where it is more appropriate.
**Please reply privately if you wish to reply to me.****

Note: The Button commentary is a good quick summary if you don't want
to go through the NATURE paper.

Cheers,
Bert

Button, Ioannidis et al, ?Power failure: why small sample size
undermines the reliability of neuroscience?



 http://www.nature.com/nrn/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nrn3475.html



A commentary by his co-author, Kate Button:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/sifting-the-evidence/2013/apr/10/unreliable-neuroscience-power-matters



 The headline from this coverage is more blunt:  ?Most brain science
papers are neurotrash?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/12/brain_science_low_power_junk/



--

Bert Gunter
Genentech Nonclinical Biostatistics