|
|
|
|
|
by lbeltrame
2207 days ago
|
|
I did not agree with the conclusions of the paper, but I fell prey of the same bias that many others had: it was "published in Lancet" and "those journals have strict peer review". The lesson I learned is that I will always scrutinize papers I read with a more critical eye, regardless of where they were published in. |
|
a) a grammar/spelling check
b) a gut check to make sure it "makes sense"
c) validation of the math/analysis
d) validation of the underlying experimental procedure used to collect the data
e) validation of the underlying selection criteria for inputs/candidates in the experiment
f) reproducibility of the experiment and results
g) something else?
h) all of the above
My impression is that "peer review" generally includes a & b and sometimes c & d.