Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

The Scientific Method03:50

The Scientific Method

69.3K
Chemistry is an empirical science. Scientists often pose questions to understand the chemistry in everyday life and seek answers to these questions. To achieve this, scientists follow a definitive series of steps that together make up the Scientific Method. This approach involves making observations, asking questions, building a hypothesis, conducting experiments, analyzing results, and forming a conclusion. 
69.3K
The Scientific Method01:32

The Scientific Method

271.5K
The scientific method is a detailed, empirical problem-solving process used by biologists and other scientists. This iterative approach involves formulating a question based on observation, developing a testable potential explanation for the observation (called a hypothesis), making and testing predictions based on the hypothesis, and using the findings to create new hypotheses and predictions.
Generally, predictions are tested using carefully-designed experiments. Based on the outcome of these...
271.5K
The Scientific Method02:40

The Scientific Method

66.2K
Research is what makes the difference between facts and opinions. Facts are observable realities, and opinions are personal judgments, conclusions, or attitudes that may or may not be accurate. In the scientific community, facts can be established only using evidence collected through empirical research.
66.2K
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

11.1K
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
11.1K
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

15.5K
Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
15.5K
Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision03:37

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision

109.5K
Scientists typically make repeated measurements of a quantity to ensure the quality of their findings and to evaluate both the precision and the accuracy of their results. Measurements are said to be precise if they yield very similar results when repeated in the same manner. A measurement is considered accurate if it yields a result that is very close to the true or the accepted value. Precise values agree with each other; accurate values agree with a true value. 
109.5K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Evaluating ExpandED: Evaluating the effectiveness of a serious game expansion pack in teaching health professional students about interprofessional care.

AEM education and training·2024
Same author

Parenting and Childbearing in Neurosurgical Residency: Perspectives from the United States and Canada.

Journal of surgical education·2023
Same author

The Brain Protein Atlas: A conglomerate of proteomics datasets of human neural tissue.

Proteomics·2022
Same author

Integrating morphologic and molecular histopathological features through whole slide image registration and deep learning.

Neuro-oncology advances·2022
Same author

Pathobiology, Diagnosis, and Current Biomarkers in Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorders.

The journal of applied laboratory medicine·2022
Same author

Introducing Simulation-Based Learning for Trainees in Chronic Pain Medicine: Needs Assessment and Suggestions for Training Scenarios.

Medical science educator·2021

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Feb 20, 2026

An Open Source Technology Platform to Manufacture Hydrogel-Based 3D Culture Models in an Automated and Standardized Fashion
08:29

An Open Source Technology Platform to Manufacture Hydrogel-Based 3D Culture Models in an Automated and Standardized Fashion

Published on: March 31, 2022

4.9K

How to reduce scientific irreproducibility: the 5-year reflection.

Clare Fiala1, Eleftherios P Diamandis1

  • 1.

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
|October 15, 2017
PubMed
Summary

Scientific irreproducibility is a major issue in clinical sciences, stemming from fraud, bias, and data problems. A proposed 5-year reflection period for high-impact papers aims to improve scientific credibility and quality.

Keywords:
high-impact publicationsirreproducible findingsreflectionsreplicationscientific reproducibilitytranslational research

More Related Videos

Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research
04:50

Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research

Published on: August 4, 2023

1.7K
Improving Reproducibility to Meet Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles 2018 Guidelines in Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis
08:52

Improving Reproducibility to Meet Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles 2018 Guidelines in Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis

Published on: November 17, 2021

2.8K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Feb 20, 2026

An Open Source Technology Platform to Manufacture Hydrogel-Based 3D Culture Models in an Automated and Standardized Fashion
08:29

An Open Source Technology Platform to Manufacture Hydrogel-Based 3D Culture Models in an Automated and Standardized Fashion

Published on: March 31, 2022

4.9K
Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research
04:50

Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research

Published on: August 4, 2023

1.7K
Improving Reproducibility to Meet Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles 2018 Guidelines in Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis
08:52

Improving Reproducibility to Meet Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles 2018 Guidelines in Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis

Published on: November 17, 2021

2.8K

Area of Science:

  • Clinical Sciences
  • Biomedical Research
  • Scientific Publishing

Background:

  • Scientific irreproducibility poses significant challenges within the clinical sciences.
  • Key contributing factors include fraud, bias, technical deficiencies, fragmented research, and big data issues.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To deeply examine six primary causes of scientific irreproducibility.
  • To explore the ramifications of irreproducibility for clinical sciences.
  • To propose novel strategies for enhancing scientific rigor and credibility.

Main Methods:

  • In-depth discussion of six identified causes of scientific irreproducibility.
  • Brief overview of proposed solutions, including result replication and detailed preclinical data inclusion.
  • Advocacy for a mandatory 5-year reflection period on high-impact clinical/translational papers.

Main Results:

  • Identified six critical factors contributing to scientific irreproducibility.
  • Highlighted the negative impact of these factors on clinical science advancements.
  • Proposed a novel reflection mechanism to assess research quality and reproducibility.

Conclusions:

  • Implementing a 5-year reflection period can serve as a benchmark for research credibility.
  • This process can initiate a positive cycle, improving the overall quality of published scientific findings.
  • Addressing irreproducibility is crucial for advancing clinical and translational science.