<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Are Most Medical Studies Wrong?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/are-most-medical-studies-wrong/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/are-most-medical-studies-wrong/</link>
	<description>Your Daily Fix of Neuroscience, Skepticism, and Critical Thinking</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 15:32:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: ScienceBlogs Channel : Medicine &#38; Health &#124; BlogCABLE.COM</title>
		<link>http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/are-most-medical-studies-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-13061</link>
		<dc:creator>ScienceBlogs Channel : Medicine &#38; Health &#124; BlogCABLE.COM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 16:33:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=8#comment-13061</guid>
		<description>[...] research is hopelessly flawed and biased, but that is not the correct interpretation. Basically, as Steve Novella, Alex Tabarrok, and I pointed out, prior probability is critical. What Ioannidis&#8217; research [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] research is hopelessly flawed and biased, but that is not the correct interpretation. Basically, as Steve Novella, Alex Tabarrok, and I pointed out, prior probability is critical. What Ioannidis&#8217; research [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Science-Based Medicine &#187; Does popularity lead to unreliability in scientific research?</title>
		<link>http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/are-most-medical-studies-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-13042</link>
		<dc:creator>Science-Based Medicine &#187; Does popularity lead to unreliability in scientific research?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 13:01:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=8#comment-13042</guid>
		<description>[...] research is hopelessly flawed and biased, but that is not the correct interpretation. Basically, as Steve Novella and, especially, Alex Tabarrok pointed out, prior probability is critical. What Ioannidis&#8217; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] research is hopelessly flawed and biased, but that is not the correct interpretation. Basically, as Steve Novella and, especially, Alex Tabarrok pointed out, prior probability is critical. What Ioannidis&#8217; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NeuroLogica Blog &#187; No Benefit from Gingko</title>
		<link>http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/are-most-medical-studies-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-7311</link>
		<dc:creator>NeuroLogica Blog &#187; No Benefit from Gingko</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:21:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=8#comment-7311</guid>
		<description>[...] this means is what John Ioannidis has been finding when looking at the clinical literature. Preliminary studies are usually wrong. We [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] this means is what John Ioannidis has been finding when looking at the clinical literature. Preliminary studies are usually wrong. We [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NeuroLogica Blog &#187; Chiropractors Invade My Blog</title>
		<link>http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/are-most-medical-studies-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-6379</link>
		<dc:creator>NeuroLogica Blog &#187; Chiropractors Invade My Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 20:07:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=8#comment-6379</guid>
		<description>[...] studies, or small numbers of pilot studies, are simply not compelling. Remember the research of John Iaonnidis - he convincingly showed that most published medical studies are later refuted by better studies. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] studies, or small numbers of pilot studies, are simply not compelling. Remember the research of John Iaonnidis &#8211; he convincingly showed that most published medical studies are later refuted by better studies. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Science-Based Medicine &#187; Fun with homeopaths and meta-analyses of homeopathy trials</title>
		<link>http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/are-most-medical-studies-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-6285</link>
		<dc:creator>Science-Based Medicine &#187; Fun with homeopaths and meta-analyses of homeopathy trials</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 05:02:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=8#comment-6285</guid>
		<description>[...] that a trial will show a positive result, the greater the odds of a false positive trial become. That&#8217;s the real significance of Ioannidis&#8217; work. Indeed, a commenter on Hawk/Handsaw [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] that a trial will show a positive result, the greater the odds of a false positive trial become. That&#8217;s the real significance of Ioannidis&#8217; work. Indeed, a commenter on Hawk/Handsaw [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Science-Based Medicine &#187; Hype over science: Does acupuncture really improve the chances of success for in vitro fertilization?</title>
		<link>http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/are-most-medical-studies-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-1187</link>
		<dc:creator>Science-Based Medicine &#187; Hype over science: Does acupuncture really improve the chances of success for in vitro fertilization?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 18:44:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=8#comment-1187</guid>
		<description>[...] plausibility, noise predominates, producing a disturbingly high proportion of seemingly &#8220;positive&#8221; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] plausibility, noise predominates, producing a disturbingly high proportion of seemingly &#8220;positive&#8221; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Science Based Medicine &#187; The infiltration of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and &#8220;integrative medicine&#8221; into academia</title>
		<link>http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/are-most-medical-studies-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-1025</link>
		<dc:creator>Science Based Medicine &#187; The infiltration of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and &#8220;integrative medicine&#8221; into academia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2008 13:02:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=8#comment-1025</guid>
		<description>[...] alone, is almost always less than 20%, that means the false positive rate for CAM research will be even higher, producing many studies that advocates can cite, while ignoring the totality of the evidence. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] alone, is almost always less than 20%, that means the false positive rate for CAM research will be even higher, producing many studies that advocates can cite, while ignoring the totality of the evidence. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mszlazak</title>
		<link>http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/are-most-medical-studies-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-55</link>
		<dc:creator>mszlazak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:18:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=8#comment-55</guid>
		<description>Steven, would you be kind enough to comment on Topher Cooper&#039;s article, &quot;Commentary on Hyman&#039;s Commentary on John P.A. Ioannidis: 

http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dgvxsgjc_0dcw55s

--------------------------</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steven, would you be kind enough to comment on Topher Cooper&#8217;s article, &#8220;Commentary on Hyman&#8217;s Commentary on John P.A. Ioannidis: </p>
<p><a href="http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dgvxsgjc_0dcw55s" rel="nofollow">http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dgvxsgjc_0dcw55s</a></p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NeuroLogica Blog &#187; Does Acupuncture Work or Not?</title>
		<link>http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/are-most-medical-studies-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-42</link>
		<dc:creator>NeuroLogica Blog &#187; Does Acupuncture Work or Not?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 19:59:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=8#comment-42</guid>
		<description>[...] far what we have seen in the acupuncture literature amounts to noise (see my earlier post on how to interpret the literature). To rise above these we need better studies. And more [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] far what we have seen in the acupuncture literature amounts to noise (see my earlier post on how to interpret the literature). To rise above these we need better studies. And more [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A second crank finds Ioannidis [denialism blog] &#183; Articles</title>
		<link>http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/are-most-medical-studies-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-32</link>
		<dc:creator>A second crank finds Ioannidis [denialism blog] &#183; Articles</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Sep 2007 20:08:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=8#comment-32</guid>
		<description>[...] Novella also addresses this research and Tabarrok&#8217;s analysis and emphasizes the importance of prior probability in determining whether a study is reliable [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Novella also addresses this research and Tabarrok&#8217;s analysis and emphasizes the importance of prior probability in determining whether a study is reliable [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
