To understand the Coronavirus and the fight against, research scientists are currently using high pressure. Your new insights, you now post often on preprint servers, without the assessment of experts. Critics fear that the care could be to come shortly.
Every day there are numerous new studies. A flood of scientific findings pours over the world – many of them in a provisional state on the so-called Preprint servers. The Background is understandable: researchers are trying as quickly as possible to gain knowledge about the Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. You try to show how we can push back under great uncertainty.
The question now is: Can this speed of good scientific practice are complied with?
The two US-ethicist Alex John London and Jonathan Kimmelman see the more critical. You published to the question of a contribution in the journal "Science". The two scientists expose therein justifications in terms of the reduced quality in times of crisis. In addition, they indicate the criteria by which good scientific practice could be secured.
Examples of declining quality are, for example, that politicians have shit on the effectiveness of a particular drug is injected. That hectic small studies and between results at press conferences to be published started, which, in turn, serve as a Basis for political decisions. Information from an Interview to mutate to Proved for stricter distance regulations while Jogging.
The ethicists emphasize that scientific processes are usually handled differently, tend to be well-rested. Small-step hypotheses would be investigated on the basis of elaborately planned studies, data evaluated and results first, independent scientists submitted before they would be published after a long process in a journal. The current corona crisis accelerate this process at all levels.
Because scientists presented their results already provisionally on the so-called preprint servers, see the Public via journalists and Social media about this sooner.
Germany bewegendster Corona Song: "Victoriam" – Listen, we support the good cause
FOCUS Online , Germany’s bewegendster Corona Song: “Victoriam” – Listen, we support the good cause
Studies should not depart from Standards of scientific quality
"The authors of the article in ‘Science’ point out that the compliance with methodological Standards is of Central importance for the quality of scientific work – in the ‘normal’ as well as in Krisenzeiten", Peter-André Alt, the President of the German rectors ‘ conference, Bonn, explains. He says: "Even if new research findings to Covid-19 are in high demand by scientists and the Public is currently particularly strong and Researchers with high expectations of the company are confronted with, must not be of the Standards of good scientific practice moved away."
Preprint publications are now well established in many disciplines and represented a good opportunity to share research data and results quickly. Researcher was always aware of the fact that this Paper had not been subject to a quality assurance Peer-Review process, you can classify the studies according to. For a wider audience, such publications are likely to be directly, however, only of limited value.
"There are specialist publications written by and for specialists and for the laymen, therefore, often little understood,“ explains Alt.
- All of the new developments to the outbreak of the Coronavirus read in the News Ticker
"Immediately and without Konkurrenzdenken"
"The lay Public should also be aware that anyone who reads Preprints and the results interpreted, good and less good science sollte" may differ;, also Anette Schmidt finds a man by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Bonn. "It becomes problematic when outside of the science – such as journalists – is tried, results are not classified, their Temporary nature is clearly understandable." From their point of view should be characterized, therefore, both by the scientists, as well as in the media reporting is always clear and comprehensible manner, that the Provisional nature of the results of research."
Nevertheless, Schmidt keeps a man from a professional point of view is encouraging that the results of research "immediately and without Konkurrenzdenken" would be shared. Thus, this could be for further research.
Meanwhile, the EU has established a platform that allows scholars from all over Europe to share their research results.
"Society expects Antworten"
"Of course, the quality of science suffers from Zeitdruck", Thomas Hartung of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health explains. "But the company expects to respond in times of crisis." It is better to be a scientist informed, as a friend on Facebook. "We as scientists can’t collect billions in taxpayers ‘ money, and then in a crisis in our ivory tower and pull back. All in silence, comes probably too late. This is reminiscent of the medical joke, the pathologist knows everything but too late.“
Hartung also sees the positive side to the developments of the last few months. "Covid-19 a scientific success story already: The first cases in November, 2019, and within weeks the causative agent was identified, diagnostics are developed, the experimental model is available and an impressive number of clinical studies on the way: 18 vaccines to be studied and on 19. April 2020 was one of the Cochrane Register 1684 Covid-19-studies – 637 for new therapies and 781 for the treatment with existing measures.“ In the meantime, the Cochrane Register is already one of 2101 Covid-19-studies. (Stand: 24. April, 12 O’clock)
You can see in the Video: masks sew it yourself: firefighters released a simple Video guide
FOCUS Online/News5 See you in the Video: masks sew it yourself: firefighters released a simple Video guide