|
This a big problem with the animal studies as well
I have read that at the animal stage there is an even more widespread problem with experiments being conducted without controls and with the researchers usually knowing which animals are on the treatment. Of course, if the animal studies are wrong then too many things that lack promise will go forward into human clinical trials, which is a major waste of money.
Medical researchers conducting badly designed research projects is a major problem. I know some statisticians who make a nice living fixing medical research AFTER it has been conducted, when a lot of work is require to save the research if it can be saved at all. Wouldn't it make more sense if there was a requirement that statisticians needed to approve of the design of a project before money was spent on trials that might be too flawed to ever be meaningful? From what I have heard, at least in the UK, the problem is that medics and MD-PhDs are so arrogant that they don't think they need to consult lowly statisticians. Still, why don't the groups that provide the funding for medical research require this?
|
Linear Mode
