A set of matched scientific post-hoc re-analyses of multiple scientific studies conducted in the US, Europe, and Australia confirmed today that the subject of scientific studies was extremely well-studied.
The studies jointly confirmed that of 78 scientific studies conducted around the world since 2000, over 6,000 re-analyses and post-hoc investigations had been conducted per study to validate methodologies, confirm data, investigate anomalies, control for factors that were not part of the original data set, or regressively analyze data for outcomes that had not been anticipated but seemed logical.
The results matched well with what investigators had predicted in a published methodological article. However, reaction in the scientific community was mixed at best, as several key data tables in the studies indicated that there was a numerical trend towards studies being well-studied, but the data did not reach statistical significance -- needed for any attribution of scientific proof.
"Clearly, further investigation is needed," said Norm Heighlock, editor of the journal Methode. "To a scientist," Dr. Heighlock explained, "the authors' conclusion is unconvincing, and may well fly in the face of fact."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment