The Great (University) Reopening Debate

VCU: Home Institution of the Blogger

Dr. Richard Wenzel, Rebecca Vokes and I  recently submitted a commentary on how to safely reopen universities and colleges to The Chronicle of Higher Education.  It was rejected.  This is not our first rejection nor will it be our last.  No worries, we have submitted the essay elsewhere. I hope to share  it with you soon.

In my meanderings on The Chronicle of Higher Education website, I came across this interesting  debate on  the reopening of universities and colleges, a varied perspective from students, faculty and support staff.

Worth reading, I recommend it.

Is The Purpose of the Peer Review to Detect A Fraud?

Is the purpose of the peer review to detect a fraud or is it to provide critical feedback on scientific papers? My inclination is for the latter.

Two recent retractions hurt the credibility of both the peer review process and eminent medical journals, as published here. 

In a time of fast and furious COVID-19 related manuscript submissions, we need to balance speedy publication review with quality control. Perhaps this special situation calls for fraud detection, which can be challenging. However, as with the recent case of Surgisphere and the New England Journal of Medicine, as previously blogged, when something seems too good to be true, it probably is a fraud.
Be exceedingly skeptical.

The Viral Power of Twitter for Infectious Diseases

A review of the viral power of Twitter for infectious diseases, pun intended, is found here in Current Infectious Diseases Reports.

No doubt, tweeting is an efficient way to efficiently share information and promote scientific findings. Twitter is also a landmine of medical misinformation.

Tweeting, much like the scalpel or prescription pad, when utilized by the wrong hand, the harm can exceed the good.

Out of Nowhere: Surgisphere- Beware of COVID-19 Guidance From Suspect Data

Source: The Guardian UK

Out of nowhere we learn of Surgisphere, a private US based company that integrates data from 96,000 patients across 1200 hospital around the world.  This sounds too good to be true and is almost certainly a scam. Unfortunately, recent COVID-19 publications in prestigious medical journals based on Surgisphere data influenced the WHO.

This high quality investigative journalism article published in The Guardian shines a revealing light on Surgisphere.

In our zeal to  expand our knowledge on COVID-19 we have compromised on quality and rigor in science. Not our finest hour.

Beware of COVID-19 guidance from suspect data

Be Skeptical: How To Read Coronavirus Studies Like a Scientist

Source NY Times

Here is an interesting essay on how to read COVID-19 studies like a scientist wherein a brief history of scientific publishing is covered starting with the 1667 publication of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society.

We have made a lot of progress since then, however, any single publication on a subject is rarely the sole truth on the matter. For example, in a rush to share the growing body of knowledge on COVID-19 poor quality reports are published, such as a small and not rigorously designed study on hydroxychloroquine.  The findings of this study are not convincing.

Further, beware of pre-prints, studies that are published prior to peer review.

Embrace a healthy amount of skepticism.

Dr. Richard Wenzel: Masterful, High Yield Perspective on COVID-19

For those seeking a masterful, high yield perspective on COVID-19, look no further.  I refer you to the video above for a presentation from our very own Dr. Richard Wenzel.

Dr. Wenzel covers a lot of ground in 45+ minutes, including important considerations for the reopening of universities.

Enjoy.