A couple of years ago, Ivan Oransky founded Retraction Watch with science journalist Adam Marcus. The mission of this blog is to highlight cases of retractions, mistakes and corrections.
These journalists have a lot work ahead of them, judging by the study made by Danielle Fanelli, a natural scientist who specialises in the study of scientific misconduct, bias and related issues and a member of the Research Ethics and Bioethics Advisory Committee of the National Research Council in Italy.
According to a study of his, published in 2009 in PLOS One and based on the metadata of several surveys, about 2% of scientists have admitted to falsifying, making up or modifying elements at least once.
And one third confessed to other "questionable practices", including "to have 'modified research results' to improve the outcome, then to have reported results they 'knew to be untrue'."
Additionally, more than 70% of scientists say they have witnessed irregular behaviour from their colleagues.
If this is the case, how reliable are the studies published every day?
Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-27543867