Topic Review - Newest First (only newest 5 are displayed)
rqayyum
Re: Re: Do we review literature properly in “Reviews”?
Thank you.
I feel sorry for people who don't progress and get stuck at one place for decades.
[Edited by rqayyum on 18-02-2006 at 02:03 AM GMT]
chameed
Re: Do we review literature properly in “Reviews”?
Good progress. From WV to Maryland. LOL
rqayyum
Re: Re: Re: Re: Limitations of Meta-analysis
Dr. Hameed, I am glad to know that you also have an appreciative nature. About WV, as they say, it is Wild and Wonderful. I am enjoying every moment of my stay here. People are poor, but straightforward. Most of all, I am enjoying the Muslim and Pakistani Community. There are quite a few wonderful Pakistani physicians here, including APPNA's new president, Dr. Piracha. I have lived in Connecticut and Illinois, but the sense of community I found here is the best. I am leaving WV in next few months to join Johns Hopkins University as Assistant Professor of Medicine and I am sure I will miss WV, and Pakistani community.
It is interesting that you talked about honest data-collection. For a reader, there is no way of knowing the honesty in data collection if author(s) are experts in their field. Experts know how to manipulate data. Recent scandal about an article published by a Korean scientist in the journal Science (on stem cells) is a good example. Even after rigorous peer-review before and after publication it took more than a year to discover (quite accidently) that it was not the true representation of the data.
To understand whether statistics are proper or not, one needs formal or informal training in statistics, which unfortunately most of us don’t have. We probably know about t-test and chi-square test, but not about the complexities of more complex tests. For example, if someone has performed a multiple linear regression, we have to take his word that he/she did it right. Otherwise, how often you have seen in articles comments about co-linearity, or leverage, or other issues related to regression being discussed in the methods section, even though all these should have been looked at and addressed before drawing a conclusion about the validity of regression. And I can give other examples of complex but commonly used tests.
chameed
Re: Re: Re: Limitations of Meta-analysis
I appreciate your “appreciative” nature. How’s life in WV? As I said earlier, the answer to your original question is “NO”. You can give importance to whatever you like but the “Materials and Methods” section of a paper must be understood clearly before one can make any comments. What one needs to look at is whether the study design is appropriate for the particular question that the paper is trying to answer. And then there is a question of honest data collection and proper statistics, and this is the red herring. So you draw your own conclusions. “Critical eye” comment was applicable to me and I don’t need any elaboration on that.
rqayyum
Re: Re: Limitations of Meta-analysis
I appreciate your interest in this topic. I agree that Methods section is a very important part of the paper, although I give importance to Results, Introduction, and Discussion parts as well.
Going back to my question, which was 'do we review literature properly in "Reviews"?' I would like to hear what do you think.
I would not comment on the 'honesty' of research. It will distract current discussion.
However, I will add a comment to the 'critical eye'. It is true that there is no substitute for experience, however, knowledge is essential for the development of 'critical eye'. Our eyes can't see what our mind does not know.
