Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Re: BioNet Controversial Topic #6

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: BioNet Controversial Topic #6

    OK...I'll take the bait. Marco mentioned that only those clearly interested
    in sharing data were responding to the most recent controversial topic, and
    he wondered if there were another side to the discussion.

    BACKGROUND
    While I am quick to acknowledge the value in combining resources where
    possible, I am slow to embrace the idea of grand repositories of data. This
    is easily traced back to my graduate training where a process was described
    for conducting scientific studies. In essence, the research question leads
    to a testable hypothesis, that defines the data that need to be collected,
    that require planning for statistical analyses "a priori." In the best
    situation, conscientious investigators are intimately involved with all
    aspects of the study, and truly understand the links between hypothesis,
    data collection, and statistical analysis. In my experience, this is a
    challenge (though quite possible) to achieve in a single site study. It
    becomes more of a challenge in multi-center studies, but can be achieved
    through effective communication during project planning, and vigilant
    monitoring during data collection.

    THE PROBLEM
    My concern for grand repositories of data is that this intimate appreciation
    for the nuances in data collection will not be adequately achieved. This
    has negative implications for the integrity of data going into the
    repository, and for data being retrieved from it. If human nature were to
    tempt some investigators to combine data that SEEM to be collected under
    SIMILAR conditions, I would be concerned that increased variability could
    obscure true differences that would have been detected in a more rigorously
    conducted study. Most importantly, "disinformation" would take time to
    correct in the literature.

    A POSSIBLE SOLUTION
    Like others have stated, I also believe that methodology sections need to be
    detailed enough to allow for replication of studies, and therefore
    validation of results by others. If this is done, colleagues will have a
    good appreciation for those conducting similar work. Rather than creating
    repositories of the data themselves, I would suggest a directory of
    investigators willing to share data. In this situation, one investigator
    will need to contact another, providing opportunities to confirm the
    appropriateness of combining data. Science still benefits from larger data
    sets, but to me, the integrity of the data would seem to be better
    safe-guarded.


    Frank L Buczek Jr, PhD
    Director, Motion Analysis Laboratory
    Shriners Hospitals for Children
    1645 West 8th Street, Erie PA, 16415, USA
    (814) 875-8805 voice, (814) 875-8756 facsimile
    fbuczek@shrinenet.org

    ---------------------------------------------------------------
    To unsubscribe send SIGNOFF BIOMCH-L to LISTSERV@nic.surfnet.nl
    For information and archives: http://isb.ri.ccf.org/biomch-l
    ---------------------------------------------------------------
Working...
X