Home   |   News    |   Discussions   |   Books   |   Curiosities
Search
Custom Search
Popular Reads

Earthquakes and animal behavior
LHC may produce time travelling particles
Country boys boast bigger junk
Running the numbers on alien life
Uh-oh, placebo
Forgetful? Blame your house
Pill to blame for rise in prostate cancer?
Cat parasite has global ambitions
Carbon monoxide keeps city dwellers happy
Magnetic field alters moral judgments
Stars manufacturing organic matter?
Unnatural selection: Courtesy of The Pill
Men 2% funnier than women
Parasite rewires sexual attraction
Novel psychiatric drugs take aim at gut bacteria
Discussions
General Science

Not-Quite Science

Physics

Climate Change

Science Fiction

Past Forums

Sponsored Links
Browse

Animal Kingdom

Biology

Climate Change

Environment

Evolution

Genetics

Humans

Mind & Brain

Prehistory

Health & Diet

Health Threats

Health & Environment

Health: From The Lab

Mental Health

Reproductive Health

Energy Alternatives

Chemistry

Computing & Electronics

Nanotechnology

Pimping Nature

Robotics & AI

Physics

Space


Curiosities
Sci Shop
Peculiar and bizarre scientific stuff that you didn't even know existed and you don't need.
Books
Book Reviews
Rusty Rockets lists his all-time favorite science titles.
Archives
2012 2011 2010
2009 2008 2007
2006 2005 2004
2003 2002 2001
2000 1999 1998
Feature Archive


22 November 2005
Chinese Research Lost In Translation
by Kate Melville

Valuable genetic research carried out in China often fails to reach the international scientific community, suggests a study published in the journal PLoS Medicine. Researcher Zhenglun Pan, of Shandong Provincial Hospital, China, and his international colleagues came to this conclusion after investigating the visibility of studies of thirteen gene-disease associations.

Searching a Chinese medical database, they found 161 studies on 12 of these gene-disease associations. But when they logged onto PubMed, a popular Western medical database, they found that only 20 of the 161 Chinese studies were indexed.

Additionally, the researchers found important differences between Chinese and non-Chinese studies. With one exception the first Chinese study appeared with a time lag (from 2 to 21 years) after the first non-Chinese study on the topic. The Chinese studies also showed significantly more prominent genetic effects than the non-Chinese studies. The researchers suggest that this was probably due to bias favoring the dissemination of impressive results, and that this bias seemed to operate beyond the Chinese studies.

Pan's work suggests that the evidence on whether a particular gene is associated with a particular disease will be skewed, depending on whether English language studies or non-English language studies are investigated. Pan added that the evidence would also be skewed depending on the extent of bias in favor of publishing "positive" spectacular results, while "negative" studies that are equally well done are not published.

Such problems could be overcome, said Pan, if all investigators working on the genetics of a specific disease were registered in a common network. "Such networks should aim for a global, inclusive outlook. The Chinese research output, as well as the output of other non-English speaking countries, should be appropriately captured. Failure to maintain a global outlook may result in a scientific literature that is driven by the opportunistic dissemination of selected results," he concluded.

Source: Public Library of Science


Social

Follow Science a GoGo


Home         All The News      Science Forum         Books, Books, Books         Curiosity Shop         About

The terms and conditions governing your use of this website.
Copyright © 1997 - 2012 Science a Go Go and its licensors. All rights reserved.