Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 8h

And here I thought it was 8hrs sleep a night, no alcohol, and kale based diet...

Eric Topol @erictopol.bsky.social · 9h

Why does the naked mole rat have the longest lifespan of any rodent, nearly 40 years?
A 30-year long mystery unraveled @ScienceMagazine today!
Its cGAS enzyme in cells has 4 missense mutations that upends its function, promoting DNA repair and suppressing inflammation
www.science.org/doi/10.1126/...

2

Reposted by Overly.Honest.Editor

JAMES HEATHERS @jamesheathers.bsky.social · 12h

Free data resources in science are having the shit mined out of them to produce X,000's of bullshit papers.

What should we do?

(Warning: I sat on this draft for too long, and publishers are already doing some of it. That's what I get for engaging with the news.)

open.substack.com/pub/jamescla...

How To Stop The Next 10,000 Bullshit Papers

Some remarkably un-radical proposals

open.substack.com

1 4 12

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 12h

Everyone else will soon enough move to a new type of product #OverlyGrumpyEditor

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 12h

...and my money is on those other secondary analyses also getting a new set of extra restrictions. All of which is sad because - just like policies everyone introduces now requiring often expensive validation - it only penalises ppl who do this type of work legitimately...

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 12h

...because you know, even if not quite, can you punish the authors *after* they've done the research? (Yes, you actually can, but whatever.)

Ironically, given the I4As you quote, many journals don't do RRs for systematic reviews (case in point)...

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 12h

I actually don't think there is anything wrong with moving the evaluation of these papers to preregistration stage. I suspect many of these get published because editors, faced with fait accompli, become lenient when looking at the actual research question - whether original and makes sense...

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 1d

Could've sworn this got one already. I guess is one of those perennial candidates.

1 1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 2d

To be fair, I'm genuinely worried about a flood of trivial and false findings before we even move to trivial and true or true and interesting #OverlyHonestEditor

Ethan Mollick @emollick.bsky.social · 4d

A lot of people are worried about a flood of trivial but true findings, but we should be just as concerned about how to handle a flood of interesting and potentially true findings. The selection & canonization process in science has been collapsing already, with no good solution

3

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 7d

@depthsofwikipedia.bsky.social
@musicnotation.bsky.social

Reposted by Overly.Honest.Editor

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 7d

Here, @royalsociety.org, I fixed that quote for you:

"I'm increasingly concerned over fascist behaviour of our fellows that threatens both science and, literally, lives of other fellows, but I'm so spineless I will do nothing about it but moan."

The Royal Society @royalsociety.org · 8d

"I am increasingly concerned over threats to the values that allow science to flourish." Read the full statement from the President of the Royal Society Sir Adrian Smith: royalsociety.org/news/2025/10...

A statement from the President of the Royal Society | Royal Society

A statement from the President of the Royal Society regarding threats to the values that allow science to flourish.

royalsociety.org

1 3 7

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 7d

Middle-truthism at its best 🤮

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 7d

Is what no self respecting leader said, ever. And yet her we are, again.

2

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 7d

Here, @royalsociety.org, I fixed that quote for you:

"I'm increasingly concerned over fascist behaviour of our fellows that threatens both science and, literally, lives of other fellows, but I'm so spineless I will do nothing about it but moan."

The Royal Society @royalsociety.org · 8d

"I am increasingly concerned over threats to the values that allow science to flourish." Read the full statement from the President of the Royal Society Sir Adrian Smith: royalsociety.org/news/2025/10...

A statement from the President of the Royal Society | Royal Society

A statement from the President of the Royal Society regarding threats to the values that allow science to flourish.

royalsociety.org

1 3 7

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 9d

Omg, had to re-read to make sure I didn't misunderstand. Has a TOC written this column?

2

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 12d

Ha, missed that completely. Thanks a lot though.

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 12d

Completely lost my Google mojo. Please help @aaronclauset.bsky.social?

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 12d

Sounds like a fascinating paper in @science.org Sci Advances, if you can find it, that is #ScientificPublishing #PeerReview

Whose papers have an edge at Science? In unusual study, journal looks in the mirror

Confidential data show being in the U.S., at a prestigious institution, and in a large team all may help

www.science.org

1 1 2

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 13d

Would it be legally binding as IP waiver?

Reposted by Overly.Honest.Editor

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 15d

Spick & Richardson offer advice to editors on how to avoid formulaic research #ResearchIntegrity #ScientificPublishing #PeerReview While I admire enthusiasm this is, forgive my cynicism, preaching to editors #OverlyCynicalEditor 1/

European Association of Science Editors @easeeditors.bsky.social · 16d

In this new ESE Viewpoint, @reeserichardson.bsky.social and Matt Spick help editors identify mass-produced research to reject them at the point of submission, reducing the burden on peer review, and the amount of poor-quality noise introduced to the published literature.

doi.org/10.3897/ese....

2 1 2

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 15d

Can't decide if that's sarcasm, given that this was just an unfiltered editorial rant :P

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 15d

Oh but if you want to try GRABDROP anyway, paper is here: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40587200/

Journal of Global Health's Guidelines for Reporting Analyses of Big Data Repositories Open to the Public (GRABDROP): preventing 'paper mills', duplicate publications, misuse of statistical inference, ...

In recent years, global accessibility to large 'big data' repositories that enable 'open research' - such as the UK Biobank, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), and Global Burde...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

1 1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 15d

So here is my likely very #UnpopularOpinion and advice on these: there is no replacement for sensible editorial judgement, but also we need to get comfortable with the idea that even with the most competent editors out there we will see this type of papers published. #ScientificPublishing 13/13

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 15d

I suspect, and people should feel free to verify this, that majority of formulaic papers are one-offs for their authors. And so asking how many NHANES papers have you published recently will do exactly nothing to stem the tide of these submissions. 12/

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 15d

And you don't need checklist for the first - you just need, well, common sense. And the other is an incredibly invasive question that is also a dangerous slippery slope in how we evaluate research. It is also pointless because we have Google for that. More importantly - and here is a spoiler - 11/

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 15d

And so I don't know. I've mixed feelings about the GRABDROP checklist mentioned in that piece, because while well intentioned it amounts to saying we should: use common sense in editorial assessment & ask authors to disclose if they did similar research before. 10/

1