Analysis reveals that journal papers often contain erroneous or incomplete data.
Peer review is failing to ensure data quality, finds a study (R. D. Chirico et al. J. Chem. Eng. Data http://doi.org/nzv; 2013). The analysis, led by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), found that about one-third of papers submitted to five physical-chemistry journals between 2003 and 2013 contained erroneous or incomplete data, which can make it hard to replicate findings and can lead to poor regulatory decisions. Peer review does not have the capacity to evaluate the current flood of data, say co-authors Michael Frenkel and Robert Chirico, chemists at NIST in Boulder, Colorado. “The rate of errors is an elephant in the room,” says Frenkel.
Related links in Nature Research
Related external links
About this article
Cite this article
Flawed data slip through. Nature 502, 131 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nj7469-131c