CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 31Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlAcademic integrity and plagiarismScientific Measurement and Uncertainty Evaluation

Bioanalytical inaccuracy: A threat to the integrity and efficiency of research

Open access
Young, Simon N., Anderson, George M.·2010·Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience
DOI 10.1503/jpn.090171PMC PMC2799499
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In recent years, the threats to the integrity of science posed by the dishonesty of a small minority of scientists,[1][1] and the biases held by most scientists,[2][2],[3][3] have become a topic of lively discussion. We believe that faulty measurement of biochemical compounds is sufficiently common

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1503/jpn.090171

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Wismer Fries et al. reported that urinary oxytocin and vasopressin in orphans were affected by early neglect, but their reported levels were nearly a million-fold too high for both peptides, using a method neither sensitive nor selective enough to measure either peptide in urine; the report drew criticism, and the authors later improved their methodology.

    “The discrepancy between measurements in unextracted and extracted plasma is two orders of magnitude, but when Wismer Fries et al. reported that urinary excretion of oxytocin and vasopressin in orphans was affected by early neglect, they reported levels that were, for both peptides, nearly a million fold too high, after applying a method that was neither sensitive enough or selective enough to”

    From Intranasal Oxytocin: Myths and Delusions (2016) · cites this paper as [74]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Lower than normal cerebrospinal fluid levels of oxytocin were measured in adult women with a history of childhood trauma and abuse, as well as in the urine of socially deprived children interacting with their mothers.

    “Lower than normal cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) levels of OXT were measured in adult women with a history of childhood trauma and abuse (31), as well as in the urine of socially deprived children interacting with their mothers (32) [but see also (33)], indicating that early-life adversity has long-lasting impact on OXT signaling.”

    From Dissecting the Role of Oxytocin in the Formation and Loss of Social Relationships (2016) · cites this paper as [33]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 74 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Young, S. N., & Anderson, G. M.
Affiliations
Yale University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience
Publisher
Canadian Science Publishing
Published
2010-01
Volume
35
Issue
1
Pages
3-6
ISSN
1180-4882 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1503/jpn.090171
PMC
PMC2799499
OpenAlex
W2137276523
Cited by
31
References
74
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Scientific Measurement and Uncertainty Evaluation
Keywords
measurement error, biochemical tests, research integrity, scientific dishonesty, researcher bias, research efficiency
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain Chemistry, Humans, Oxytocin, Serotonin, Tryptamines, Vasopressins, Biomarkers, Quinolinic Acid, Biomedical Research

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