English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Growing concern that most published results, including those widely agreedupon, may be false are rarely examined against rapidly expanding researchproduction. Replications have only occurred on small scales due to prohibitiveexpense and limited professional incentive. We introduce a novel,high-throughput replication strategy aligning 51,292 published claims aboutdrug-gene interactions with high-throughput experiments performed through theNIH LINCS L1000 program. We show (1) that unique claims replicate 19% morefrequently than at random, while those widely agreed upon replicate 45% morefrequently, manifesting collective correction mechanisms in science; but (2)centralized scientific communities perpetuate claims that are less likely toreplicate even if widely agreed upon, demonstrating how centralized,overlapping collaborations weaken collective understanding. Decentralizedresearch communities involve more independent teams and use more diversemethodologies, generating the most robust, replicable results. Our findingshighlight the importance of science policies that foster decentralizedcollaboration to promote robust scientific advance.

Centralized "big science" communities more likely generate non-replicable results