Title |
Talking the talk, but not walking the walk: RT‐qPCR as a paradigm for the lack of reproducibility in molecular research
|
---|---|
Published in |
European Journal of Clinical Investigation, September 2017
|
DOI | 10.1111/eci.12801 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Stephen Bustin, Tania Nolan |
Abstract |
Poorly executed and inadequately reported molecular measurement methods are amongst the causes underlying the lack of reproducibility of much biomedical research. Although several high impact factor journals have acknowledged their past failure to scrutinise adequately the technical soundness of manuscripts, there is a perplexing reluctance to implement basic corrective measures. The reverse transcription real time quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) is probably the most straightforward measurement technique available for RNA quantification and is widely used in research, diagnostic, forensic and biotechnology applications. Despite the impact of the minimum information for the publication of quantitative PCR experiments (MIQE) guidelines, which aim to improve the robustness and the transparency of reporting of RT-qPCR data, we demonstrate that elementary protocol errors, inappropriate data analysis and inadequate reporting continue to be rife and conclude that the majority of published RT-qPCR data are likely to represent technical noise. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 6 | 9% |
United Kingdom | 3 | 4% |
Germany | 3 | 4% |
Spain | 2 | 3% |
Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
Comoros | 1 | 1% |
Guinea | 1 | 1% |
Canada | 1 | 1% |
Austria | 1 | 1% |
Other | 1 | 1% |
Unknown | 47 | 70% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 56 | 84% |
Scientists | 5 | 7% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 6% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 1% |
Unknown | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 232 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 40 | 17% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 31 | 13% |
Student > Bachelor | 29 | 13% |
Student > Master | 27 | 12% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 5% |
Other | 32 | 14% |
Unknown | 61 | 26% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 59 | 25% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 35 | 15% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 6% |
Immunology and Microbiology | 12 | 5% |
Engineering | 7 | 3% |
Other | 36 | 16% |
Unknown | 70 | 30% |