Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41546837›Full record

ArticleInfection2026

Contaminating the evidence: the reproducibility crisis and fraud in infectious disease research.

Richard R Watkins

Abstract readEditorial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Infection, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Richard R WatkinsDivision of Infectious Diseases, Northeast Ohio Medical University, 4209 OH-44, Rootstown, OH, 44272, USA. rwatkins@neomed.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Irreproducible and fraudulent research is an enormous problem that decreases the public's trust in biomedical science. Unfortunately, infectious disease (ID) research has not escaped the reproducibility crisis and investigator maleficence. This article describes the scope of the problem, explores some of the reasons why investigators commit research fraud, and discusses the surprising lack of oversight by relevant stakeholders including the National Institutes of Health (NIH), scientific journals, and academic institutions. Finally, a novel solution for tackling fraud in ID research is proposed.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchCommunicable DiseasesScientific MisconductHumansNational Institutes of Health (U.S.)Reproducibility of ResultsUnited States

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.