Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35782279›Full record

ArticleSports medicine and health science2022

How to be a better scientist: Lessons from scientific philosophy, the historical development of science, and past errors within exercise physiology.

Robert A Robergs, Olumide Opeyemi, Samuel Torrens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sports medicine and health science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. CaBiomolecules · 2025
    Review
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Robert A RobergsSchool of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, O Block, A Wing, Level 4, Room A419, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, Queensland, Australia.
Olumide OpeyemiSchool of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, O Block, A Wing, Level 4, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, Queensland, Australia.
Samuel TorrensSchool of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, O Block, A Wing, Level 4, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

What is science? While a simple question, the answer is complex. Science is a process involving human behaviour, and due to the human influence, science is often not pursued correctly. In fact, one can argue that we still do not know what the "correct" pursuit of science should entail. This is because science remains a work in progress, differs for different questions, and we often are not aware of the mistakes made until years, or decades, later. Such mistakes are common, regardless of the discipline. Within exercise physiology, mistakes have been frequent and led to eventual corrections; the replacement of the post-exercise rate of oxygen consumption (V̇O

Indexed as

EpistemologyFalsificationKuhnPhilosophyPopperScienceTheories

Identifiers

PMID35782279
PMCPMC9219292

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.