Science vs rationalization!
A couple of weeks ago we submitted a “Letter to the Editor” to the Am J Orthod Dentofacial Ortho and wrote about numerous shortcomings of one of their recently published articles entitled "Effect of mobile phone use on metal ion release from fixed orthodontic appliances". As we believe that journals must publish science (and not rationalization) and I think that this may be of interest for other researchers, as an example, we share only one of my comments and the authors’ response as well as the editor’s viewpoint.
Paper title:
Effect of mobile phone use on metal ion release from fixed orthodontic appliances
Our comment:
“....our research on the accelerated release of heavy metals from dental fillings after exposure to mobile phone radiation dates back to 2008"
"....people now frequently use their mobile phones for surfing the web, checking social networks and playing games (sometimes they spend much more time for these activities than making phone calls). Therefore, it is a major shortcoming that for evaluation the relationship between mobile phone usage time and the nickel release, the authors did not assess the duration of using internet through Wi-Fi.”
Journal’s response:
“ 3. The third claim is the usage of mobile phones for other activities such as playing games or web surfing. In the materials and method part of the Saghiri article it is stated that "For the next visit, a chronometer was given to the patients to calculate how many minutes they used their cell phone during the second week of the experiment.", which include the activities mentioned in the letter.”
“This reviewer finds no shortcoming in the study published by Saghiri et al as published.”
A simple basic question:
If the authors were aware of this point, why didn’t they ask their participants not to use other RF- emitting devices such as laptops (wi-fi connected laptops)?
"During the regular checkups, the patients were asked not to use their cell phones for 1week, and saliva samples were taken from them at the end of the week (this was considered the control group)".
The full letter that includes other shortcomings of this paper can be accessed at URL:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281422821_Effect_of_mobile_phone_use_on_metal_ion_release_from_fixed_orthodontic_appliances
By the way, we'd like to know if there is a way to ask the journals not to publish rationalization instead of publishing science?
Best regards
Maryam Paknahad, DDs
SMJ Mortazavi, Ph.D
Ghazal Mortazavi, DDs
Research Effect of mobile phone use on metal ion release from fixed o...
Hello
I don't think there is any (easy) way to change the mindset of any publisher or Editor . Thay have their own point of view also.
If you are not satisfied with the answer you can reach other experts to discuss the matter. PubPeer is a site where you can raise concern and it attracts other researchers to comment also. once the comments gather against a paper, Editor will have to respond. Many papers are retracted these days due to such acts..
Hello
I don't think there is any (easy) way to change the mindset of any publisher or Editor . Thay have their own point of view also.
If you are not satisfied with the answer you can reach other experts to discuss the matter. PubPeer is a site where you can raise concern and it attracts other researchers to comment also. once the comments gather against a paper, Editor will have to respond. Many papers are retracted these days due to such acts..
hi,
have you try to send your letter to Science reports?,
I am editor in this review and I believe that the mindset of this journal
is different
best
Alain Chapel
"Policy drives evidence. Never the reverse."
~ Attributed to a Senator from Virginia, (1990), quoted by King Davis, PhD, LMSW-ACP, during his 2014 Carter Center Mental Health Task Force Keynote address.
We only see evidence if we are looking. Policy determines who is funded and enabled to conduct observations, while dictating their direction, focus and interpretation lenses. Policy also governs whether work processes and products are awarded (or denied) institutional legitimization -- critical for dissemination, integration into curricula (and policy feedback), access to resources, and translation into decisions, technologies and behavior.
Returning to SMJ Mortazavi's general question: On a case-by-case basis, rigorous (yet kind) mentoring and peer feedback may improve the quality of scientific investigations -- especially when rationalization occurs out of inexperience and/or imprecision rather than intent. However, current policies throughout our society often drive, disseminate and amplify rationalization at the expense of science.
Wise policies are required before we can expect wise 'evidence-based' decisions.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Academic Journals