This Blog AMICOR is a communication instrument of a group of friends primarily interested in health promotion, with a focus on cardiovascular diseases prevention.
To contact send a message to
'Most of what is published in journals is just plain wrong or nonsense'
Former editor of BMJ Richard Smith says
The peer review process – long considered the gold standard of quality scientific research – is a “sacred cow” that should be slaughtered. He also says 'Most of what is published in journals is just plain wrong or nonsense'
Dr Trish Groves, the current head of research at BMJ said that, while peer review wasn’t perfect, it was “still the best way to help research funders, conference organisers, and journal editors decide which studies to support and disseminate and to help readers, the public, patients, and healthcare providers decide what evidence to use in decision making.”
I agree with Richard Smith. I disagree with Trish Groves.
Richard says 'wrong or nonsense' Trish says 'not perfect'. So it is obvious that there is serious disagreement between them.
What do you think? Whom do you agree with? What alternative method would you prefer?