Medical students are using popular research tool to pump out misleading studies
1–10 of 110 posts
Re: Medical students are using popular research tool to pump out misleading studies
#2They're just generating observational hypotheses for future investigators to examine further and maybe test in a trial. It should be presented as an observational hypothesis.
Re: Medical students are using popular research tool to pump out misleading studies
#3My assumption is the credibility of a non-PhD-holding medical student’s research is 0, just like (almost) any other inexperienced researcher.
Re: Medical students are using popular research tool to pump out misleading studies
#490% biomedicine papers are bullshit. These students are just practicing bullshit.
Re: Medical students are using popular research tool to pump out misleading studies
#5My assumption is the credibility of a non-PhD-holding medical student’s research is 0, just like (almost) any other inexperienced researcher.
I guess it depends on who the coauthors and PI are - some academic mentors can be overly trusting and ‘hands-off.’ A lone medical student’s self published paper shouldn’t be worth much though…
Re: Medical students are using popular research tool to pump out misleading studies
#6My assumption is the credibility of a non-PhD-holding medical student’s research is 0, just like (almost) any other inexperienced researcher.
This is really far too broad a brush.
Do most medical students publish useless case studies trying to jockey for residency spots and signal hustle/devotion? No doubt!
But there are a good handful of medical students who are still (surprisingly) in it for the medicine and not the money. And that handful is exceedingly capable; no reason they can’t publish valuable work with the right collaborators and resources.
Re: Medical students are using popular research tool to pump out misleading studies
#7My assumption is the credibility of a non-PhD-holding medical student’s research is 0, just like (almost) any other inexperienced researcher.
This is really far too broad a brush. Do most medical students publish useless case studies trying to jockey for residency spots and signal hustle/devotion? No doubt! But there are a good handful of medical students who are still (surprisingly) in it for the medicine and not the money. And that handful is exceedingly capable; no reason they can’t publish valuable work with the right collaborators and resources.
> no reason they can’t publish valuable work with the right collaborators
Despite h-index claiming to balance quantity and quality, it obviously incentives quantity over quality (no single publication can increment h-index as much as churning out a few worthless publications that cite each other); med students overwhelmingly follow those incentives trying to secure better residencies
Re: Medical students are using popular research tool to pump out misleading studies
#8My assumption is the credibility of a non-PhD-holding medical student’s research is 0, just like (almost) any other inexperienced researcher.
Since we have seen that 50%+ of findings even in medical and other natural sciences are not repruductible it's obvious that even PhD people are mostly incompetent.
Re: Medical students are using popular research tool to pump out misleading studies
#990% biomedicine papers are bullshit. These students are just practicing bullshit.
90% of statistics on the internet are made up anyway
Re: Medical students are using popular research tool to pump out misleading studies
#10My assumption is the credibility of a non-PhD-holding medical student’s research is 0, just like (almost) any other inexperienced researcher.
As a clinician-academic who published in The Lancet during medical school, I think this goes a bit far. Unfortunately student doctors are encouraged to publish whether or not they actually have an interest in research… but that shouldn’t discount the work of those who are genuinely engaged.
But certainly we should always approach the literature critically, including the author list, journal of publication and its peer-review practices, and the methods.