There are several manuscripts accepted in journals with methodological errors (Improper Study design, sample size, inclusion exclusion criteria, research question). These all lead to a useless research work. Which can be used only for personal benefit not for others. Nobody will read a bad article and cite.
All the answers are welcome ::NB:: It is a debate for the best answers scientifically written with few references will be published in the conference proceeding and also in the indexed journal after editorial review from the NJE and scientific committee of ICRMSW2013.
In fact I fully disagree with the comments of Ms Reshu and Mr. Brijesh. The fact that today "research" is being made "compulsive" - and hence its value is being degraded. I do not see any future of "applied research" if the current phase of research continues in the Educational Institutions - which to our dismay have turned out to be degree churning institutions only. The "intent to research" comes from "intent to learn" for which the "learning experience" is the only reward. Unfortunately, we lay emphasis on acquiring degrees - which we know one can acquire so easily today. We must not forget that all the great researchers had no formal degrees - Edison did not go to school and Marconi learnt the lessons of physics at his home. The journals in fact today are mouth organs - credit rendering agencies. My focal area of research has been "research in dentistry", and I am amused to say that instead of focusing on new developments - the entire dental community (including the academic researchers in advanced countries) tries to evaluate different materials/treatment offerings already available commercially and most of the focus of discussion is "this study found this" and "that study found that", "another found that" instead of tracing the logical reasons for the differences in study. Most of the academic researchers achieve a "p" value
Not at all. I have more than ten papers indicating the methodological errors in International journals - most of them pubmed index and having an impact factor. It is pity that such papers find place in journals or indicate wrong inferences. The problem is that a lot of new researchers look onto these published works for framing their researches, which eventually is a waste of resources. In fact, I have found that around 20-30% research works reported in journals have a methodological error. This implies that peer review is not of the desired quality.
Dear Dr. Varun Arora,
Thank you so much for your response. I agree with your comment. I am going through your publications related to this. You can even make a review abstract and submit to [email protected]. It will be a great help to the delegates. We need a better research culture in developing countries. That's why we have planned this conference to transfer the ideas and thoughts with international resource persons and natitiona resource persons. There are more than 100 resource persons for this conference from different universities, medical associations, journal from the world. Even ICMR, Cochrane etc.. also doing plenary sessions, symposiums and workshops. It will be updated soon.
Please try to attend and share your thoughts.
This culture of improper use of statistics and research methods seems to be further intensified due to conflicting interests of donor agencies along with nepotism prevalent in journal publication. There is a need for accreditation of journals in accordance with at least a national research body. But we also need to look at the larger picture and emphasize on the standardization of education among the budding researchers with special stress on scientific writing.
Dear Dr. Reshu Sagtani ,
I agree with your comments. Nepal Health Research council and Nepal Medical Association have to take some initiative related to this for approving medical journals in Nepal.
In fact I fully disagree with the comments of Ms Reshu and Mr. Brijesh. The fact that today "research" is being made "compulsive" - and hence its value is being degraded. I do not see any future of "applied research" if the current phase of research continues in the Educational Institutions - which to our dismay have turned out to be degree churning institutions only. The "intent to research" comes from "intent to learn" for which the "learning experience" is the only reward. Unfortunately, we lay emphasis on acquiring degrees - which we know one can acquire so easily today. We must not forget that all the great researchers had no formal degrees - Edison did not go to school and Marconi learnt the lessons of physics at his home. The journals in fact today are mouth organs - credit rendering agencies. My focal area of research has been "research in dentistry", and I am amused to say that instead of focusing on new developments - the entire dental community (including the academic researchers in advanced countries) tries to evaluate different materials/treatment offerings already available commercially and most of the focus of discussion is "this study found this" and "that study found that", "another found that" instead of tracing the logical reasons for the differences in study. Most of the academic researchers achieve a "p" value
I appreciate the comments of Varun Arora which are storming. He has fumed out many thoughts of many other scientists, in fact. Good examples were quoted for excellent scientists with out degrees. It is really a tragedy, that research is being enforced and being compelled. Research is re searching and not reproducing some body's findings. originality, intention to learn, discovering inventions are disappearing. It is sad and to be controlled for a good future. lalitha kabilan
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematics
- Statistics