Cited by 294Healthcare cost, quality, practicesMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsHealth and Medical Research Impacts

Research waste is still a scandal—an essay by Paul Glasziou and Iain Chalmers

Glasziou, Paul, Chalmers, Iain·2018·BMJ

Abstract

Progress has been made towards reducing the 85% of wasted effort in medical research—and the huge amounts of money misspent and harm caused to patients—but there’s still a long way to go, say Paul Glasziou and Iain Chalmers

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.k4645

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Glasziou, P., & Chalmers, I.
Affiliations
Bond University (AU)
Corresponding author
Glasziou, Paul
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2018-11-12
Pages
k4645
ISSN
  • 1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
OpenAlex
W2901453117
Cited by
294
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 31
FWCI
36.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • Bond University Research Portal (Bond University) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare cost, quality, practices
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health and Medical Research Impacts
Keywords
research waste, medical research, research productivity, research funding, research efficiency

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review