making sense of science and evidence 2010 annual meeting

27
Making sense of science and evidence Tracey Brown Sense About Science 16 th November 2010

Upload: crossref

Post on 06-Dec-2014

805 views

Category:

Technology


0 download

DESCRIPTION

 

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting

Making sense of science and evidence

Tracey Brown

Sense About Science

16th November 2010

Page 2: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting

New fears over additives

in children's food

The Guardian, 8th May 2007

GM vandals force

science firms to

reduce research

The Times, 16th Oct 2005

Fears over gender bender

Chemical in our food packaging

The Daily Express, 30th Jan 2007

Wi-Fi: Children at risk from 'electronic smog' The Independent 22nd April 2007

Public debate

on hybrid

embryos

BBC Online, 11th January 2007

Chlorine in tap

water

‘nearly doubles

the risk of birth

defects’

Daily Mail 31st May 2008

Mouthwash ‘can raise cancer risk’Metro 13th January 2009

Bowel cancer doubles among the under-30sDaily Mail 31st March 2009

Cosmetics ‘expose women to 175 chemicals in a day’Daily Mail 4th September 2006

Page 3: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting

ORBIT CLOSE Woman ‘given bovine TB by garden badger’

Scientists create pigs with

cystic fibrosis in search

for life-saving new treatments

Fish Oil enhances children’s

speech

How a ‘cocktail’ of food additives could harm

young brains

Page 4: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 5: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 6: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting

News Media

Press Officers

Conference Organisers

Higher Education

Teachers

Parliamentarians

Governments

NGOs

Medical Charities

Health Service

Companies

Policy Groups

Community Organisations

TV programming

Discussion Forums

Museums

Libraries

Celebrities

Publishers

Lifestyle Sector

Websites

People interested in peer review

Page 7: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 8: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 9: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 10: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 11: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 12: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 13: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 14: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 15: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 16: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 17: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 18: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 19: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 20: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 21: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting

What people ask about…

Help me get to grips with it• Should we worry?• Can I get something from

scientists?• Is it a scare story? • Is it science?• Who says it’s safe?

How much do we know?• What do scientists actually

know?• What tests have been done?• How sure are they?

Balance of scientific opinion

• Is it majority opinion?• How are scientists split?

Legitimacy• Is it a proper study?• How can I tell?• Have they talked to

scientists? • What kind of study is it?

Page 22: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting

Peer trouble

How fail safe is our current system at

ensuring the quality and integrity of

research? Not very, says John Crace

The Guardian, February 11 2003

Lies, all lies. But who do you tell?

The Times, May 14 2007

Can peer review police fraud?Nature Neuroscience, February 1 2006

A question of ethicsMedical journals are an immoral

marketing tool for drug companies,

according to a former editor of the BMJ. The Guardian, June 30 2005

UK autism fracas fuels calls for peer review reformNature Medicine, 1 April 2004

Peer Review Under StressScience, April 20 2007

Casualties of fraudDon't believe all you read in medical journals - their methods of assuring quality are often

less than reliable.The Guardian, October 30 2006

Page 23: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting
Page 24: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting

Reasons for Reviewing

n=3597

16%

33%

34%

30%

46%

85%

69%

72%

90%

% agree

Page 25: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting

Overall satisfaction with peer review

(n=4037)

8%

61%

22%

8% 1%

Very Satisfied

Satisfied

Neither satisfied nordissatisfiedDissatisfied

Very Dissatisfied

Page 26: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting

Purpose of peer review

33

37

62

57

82

71

64

33

38

58

54

77

64

61

79

81

84

81

93

92

86

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Detects fraud

Detects plagiarism

Determines the importance of findings

Ensures previous work is acknowledged

Improves the quality of the published paper

Determines the originality of the manuscript

That it selects the best manuscripts for the journal

Should be able

Is able

Currentlyfulfils

n = 4037% agree

Page 27: Making Sense of Science and Evidence 2010 Annual Meeting

Making sense of science and evidence

Tracey Brown

Sense About Science

16th November 2010