One in five genetics papers contains errors thanks to Excel (2016)
1–10 of 267 posts
Re: One in five genetics papers contains errors thanks to Excel (2016)
#2Even when this paper was published, errors due to Excel mangled gene names were well known for at least a decade.
Somewhat recently, some of the more error prone genes were renamed to accommodate Excel. (Ex: SEPT7 -> SEPTIN7)
Re: One in five genetics papers contains errors thanks to Excel (2016)
#3It's not really Excel, is it? But users not reviewing what's happening, not paying attention.
Re: One in five genetics papers contains errors thanks to Excel (2016)
#4I studied bioinformatics in university back in 2005, and the first subject we were trained on was not Python or Java, but using Excel. Our teachers explicitly told us about excel's conversions to dates and other pitfalls. I find it mind-boggling that some researchers still made these mistakes 10 years later.
Excel is a wonderful tool. But you need to learn your tools and find out about possible footguns.
Re: One in five genetics papers contains errors thanks to Excel (2016)
#5Only one in five? Evidence of egregious overengineering by the Excel team.
Re: One in five genetics papers contains errors thanks to Excel (2016)
#6Let me reword this. "One in five genetics papers contains errors because the authors were careless when using Excel".
I dislike Excel for what it does (EUCs, nearly impossible to track changes, etc.) But on the other hand it is an amazing tool.
Re: One in five genetics papers contains errors thanks to Excel (2016)
#7Let me reword this. "One in five genetics papers contains errors because the authors were careless when using Excel". I dislike Excel for what it does (EUCs, nearly impossible to track changes, etc.) But on the other hand it is an amazing tool.
> One in five genetics papers contains errors because the authors were careless when using Excel
Or Excel is a remarkably easy tool to mishandle because of generally unexpected transformations it makes 'for you' automatically in an easy to miss way.
Re: One in five genetics papers contains errors thanks to Excel (2016)
#8Let me reword this. "One in five genetics papers contains errors because the authors were careless when using Excel". I dislike Excel for what it does (EUCs, nearly impossible to track changes, etc.) But on the other hand it is an amazing tool.
Oh, come on. The Excel user interface encourages mistakes, as surely as a bicycle with handlebars that steer backwards.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFzDaBzBlL0
It's not all on the users.
Re: One in five genetics papers contains errors thanks to Excel (2016)
#9It's not really Excel, is it? But users not reviewing what's happening, not paying attention.
This attitude is at the root of why software is so much worse than it could be. "It's the users' fault" as a real root cause is borderline non-existent, because it can always be obviated in the software, even though the kind of talent that can do that for complex systems is exceedingly rare.
Re: One in five genetics papers contains errors thanks to Excel (2016)
#10[deleted]