Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
release aaaaaaaaaaaaarceaaaaaaaaam

by John P. A. Ioannidis

Date (published): 2005-08-30
Primary Language:  en (lookup ISO-639 code)
This journal-article is a release (version) of the work  aaaaaaaaaaaaavkvaaaaaaaaam. There may be other releases (eg, pre-prints, formal publications, etc) linked to the same work.

Published in PLOS Medicine by Public Library of Science
ISSN-L: 1549-1277
Volume: 2
Issue: 8
Page(s): e124
Publisher: Public Library of Science
Release Status: published
Release Type: journal-article


No known abstracts.

All Contributors

Attribution Order Name Role
1 John P. A. Ioannidis author

Known Files and URLs

SHA-1 Size (bytes) File Type Links
3f242a192acc258b... 255629 application/pdf journals.plos.org (publisher)


This release citing other releases.
  1. Ioannidis JP, Haidich AB, Lau J. Any casualties in the clash of randomised and observational evidence? BMJ. 2001;322:879–880
  2. Lawlor DA, Davey Smith G, Kundu D, Bruckdorfer KR, Ebrahim S. Those confounded vitamins: What can we learn from the differences between observational versus randomised trial evidence? Lancet. 2004;363:1724–1727.
  3. Vandenbroucke JP. When are observational studies as credible as randomised trials? Lancet. 2004;363:1728–1731.
  4. Michiels S, Koscielny S, Hill C. Prediction of cancer outcome with microarrays: A multiple random validation strategy. Lancet. 2005;365:488–492.
  5. Ioannidis JPA, Ntzani EE, Trikalinos TA, Contopoulos-Ioannidis DG. Replication validity of genetic association studies. Nat Genet. 2001;29:306–309.
  6. Colhoun HM, McKeigue PM, Davey Smith G. Problems of reporting genetic associations with complex outcomes. Lancet. 2003;361:865–872.
Download Full Text
Release Type journal-article
Container Metadata
Open Access Publication
ISSN-L:  1549-1277
Fatcat:  aaaaaaaaaaaaaeiraaaaaaaaam
Fatcat Bits

State is "active". Revision:
As JSON object via API