@PFIZE®baba
bubu12 : l’efficacité
est démontrée par les études de phases 3 qui sont publiées. Ce n’est pas une
nouveauté que les phases 3 soient réalisées par le fabriquant
Corollary 6 : The hotter a scientific field (with more
scientific teams involved), the less likely the research findings are to be
true. This seemingly paradoxical corollary follows because, as stated
above, the PPV of isolated findings decreases when many teams of investigators
are involved in the same field. This may explain why we occasionally see major
excitement followed rapidly by severe disappointments in fields that draw wide
attention. With many teams working on the same field and with massive
experimental data being produced, timing is of the essence in beating
competition. Thus, each team may prioritize on pursuing and disseminating its
most impressive “positive” results. “Negative” results may become attractive
for dissemination only if some other team has found a “positive” association on
the same question. In that case, it may be attractive to refute a claim made in
some prestigious journal. The term Proteus phenomenon has been coined to
describe this phenomenon of rapidly alternating extreme research claims and
extremely opposite refutations [29].
Empirical evidence suggests that this sequence of extreme opposites is very
common in molecular genetics [29].