He is the thorn in the seat meat a sluggish self, not to question science. He it is who doubts the quality of research. The calculates that since 2005, the results of most of the many taxpayer-funded studies are wrong. 85% of research resources are “wasted”. And that’s nice talk, or Hide a bad study results is not a trivial offence, but a “matter of life and death” can be – for example, if shoddy biomedical research pointless or even dangerous experiments on the patients. The personified bad Conscience of science, health scientist John Ioannidis of Stanford University, will conduct research in Berlin: “We want to find out how to research better can work”. On Wednesday, the 54-Year-old opened at the QUEST Center of the Berlin Institute for health research (BIH) is a “sister Institute” of its California research center METRICS, the METRIC-Berlin. With the support of the Einstein Foundation and the Charité Foundation, the New York-born, Athens-raised mathematician and physician, visiting researcher (Visiting Fellow) at the BIH.

awareness raising

could it be possible, Ioannidis, of the “Rockstar” of the Meta-research, the Researcher on the research to get to Berlin, would have to be Quest Director, Ulrich Dirnagl is not a dream. It was a proposal of the former science Senator Jürgen Zöllner, in the meantime, head of the Charité Foundation. “Ioannidis has managed to arouse the awareness of the problem of quality assurance in the Sciences,” said Zöllner on the occasion of the Metric-Berlin-opening. This is not only for a better quality of research – Charité and elsewhere – is important, “but for the entire society”. Many of the current discussions in which facts are becoming more and more called into question, from climate change to the measles vaccination, would have something to do with a loss of confidence in science. And even the researchers themselves have doubts about the System. A survey from 2009, according to two percent of the researchers surveyed had admitted to falsifying data, a third claimed to have results ever been fined. Unnecessary expenditure of 100 billion euros a year, so a tax collector.

Ioannidis is not ignored the Problem. A thousand times have been, his Work cited, and a million times downloaded, in which he demonstrates with data, research studies carried out much more frequently than assumed to be poorly planned, poorly, or even if you are good and valuable to be released for far too long, or not at all.

About half of the research results is incorrect – “it hurts”

At its Metrics-the centre – and now also in Berlin – explores Ioannidis, therefore, “how we do science, to plan, analyze, reward, evaluate, and disseminate results. And whether it is useful, how we do it and how you can make the most of science.“ Because for all the criticism Ioannidis is by no means an “enemy” of science, or even a cynic, can’t believe that the researchers could detect the errors of your own Guild and change the System. “Science is clearly the best thing that could happen to the people and their efficiency and ability to change the world, is crucial for our future as a species,” he says. You could do a lot, the errors of the system and more reliable, to get scientifically sound answers to important questions. Berlin had with the Quest-Center of the BIH is already a good Basis for this.

more than half of what you research, perhaps incorrectly, the “hurt only once,” says Annette grüters-kieslich, Dean of Charité. The create great uncertainty, and “Defense power”. Therefore, it is important to improve the process “proactive” and “sensitive”. In this spirit, Ioannidis was an “enrichment” for the Charité.

incentive systems for better research

Because the University hospital is the international scientific community and their negligence in quality control: the results of 60 percent of clinical studies at the Charité, will not be published as prescribed, within two years, says Ulrich Dirnagl, founder and Director of the Quest center, will work closely with Ioannidis together. “Less than half of the non-clinical studies meet the Standards for solid, statistically reliable statements are necessary, such as randomization and blinding.” And less than five percent of the clinical trials, the Charité, the raw data will be made available to other researchers for Review or use available to the public. “This is not only at the Charité, but also in the world,” says Dirnagl. Together with Ioannidis, the researcher does not want to only criticize, but also incentive systems for researchers to create, to make it better. The Quest awards-Center prices for researchers, the experiments of other working group check or place their data on public servers.

More about

column: Dr. Wewetzer A cookbook full of cancer

Hartmut Wewetzer

money plays but a minor role, first and foremost, tools should be developed for better research and the problem of consciousness will be sharpened. In the pharmacy it was pronounced, has always been stronger, writes Martin Lohse, member of the Board of the Max Delbrück center. “It is estimated that in the basic biological research things wrong could be” and, therefore, the key would be wonderful experiments in “rule”. Because in the field of basic research, moving on uncertain Terrain, the area of the discovery. “You can’t blame Columbus, he has painted no travel plan and he has not discovered what he wanted to discover,” says Lohse. Nevertheless, the result was great. It could be that researchers do not find something you understand at the beginning. “Then you have to explore far and as long as check to be sure.”