TY  - GEN
AB  - Success as a biomedical scientist depends on publishing relevant findings to answer a biological question. A scientist needs to publish as frequently as possible in as many prestigious outlets as possible to meet certain requirements set forth by the institution to stay afloat in the hypercompetitive environment for obtaining grant funding.  However, publication bias can be detrimental to the reproducibility and replicability of a study. It can also disrupt the self-correcting mechanism of the scientific method. Publication bias can lead to a lack of transparency within the study where an unpublished neutral or negative result could be necessary for another scientist to reproduce and extend the original idea. This bias has contributed to an uncomfortable trend within all scientific communities; that all novel, exciting, and innovative findings deserve more emphasis over reproducibility of the experiments or the methods.
AD  - Oregon Health and Science University
AU  - Hwee, Jason
DA  - 2015
DO  - 10.6083/M49P30MQ
DO  - DOI
ED  - McWeeney, Shannon
ED  - Advisor
ID  - 2956
KW  - Workflow
KW  - User-Computer Interface
KW  - Biomedical Engineering
KW  - Reproducibility of Results
KW  - Negative Results
KW  - Publishing
KW  - Publication Bias
L1  - https://digitalcollections.ohsu.edu/record/2956/files/3730_etd.pdf
L2  - https://digitalcollections.ohsu.edu/record/2956/files/3730_etd.pdf
L4  - https://digitalcollections.ohsu.edu/record/2956/files/3730_etd.pdf
LK  - https://digitalcollections.ohsu.edu/record/2956/files/3730_etd.pdf
N2  - Success as a biomedical scientist depends on publishing relevant findings to answer a biological question. A scientist needs to publish as frequently as possible in as many prestigious outlets as possible to meet certain requirements set forth by the institution to stay afloat in the hypercompetitive environment for obtaining grant funding.  However, publication bias can be detrimental to the reproducibility and replicability of a study. It can also disrupt the self-correcting mechanism of the scientific method. Publication bias can lead to a lack of transparency within the study where an unpublished neutral or negative result could be necessary for another scientist to reproduce and extend the original idea. This bias has contributed to an uncomfortable trend within all scientific communities; that all novel, exciting, and innovative findings deserve more emphasis over reproducibility of the experiments or the methods.
PB  - Oregon Health and Science University
PY  - 2015
T1  - Evaluating virtualization and workflow management systems for biomedical applications to increase computational scientific reproducibility
TI  - Evaluating virtualization and workflow management systems for biomedical applications to increase computational scientific reproducibility
UR  - https://digitalcollections.ohsu.edu/record/2956/files/3730_etd.pdf
Y1  - 2015
ER  -