The Scientist

» science publishing and disease/medicine

Most Recent

image: Week in Review: October 21–25

Week in Review: October 21–25

By | October 25, 2013

PubMed launches Commons; measuring HIV’s latent reservoir; immune-related pathway variation in genome, microbiome; rapamycin and flu vaccines; grasshopper mice resistant to pain

0 Comments

image: Measuring Latent HIV

Measuring Latent HIV

By | October 24, 2013

The latent HIV provirus reservoir persisting in CD4+ T cells is potentially 60 times larger than previously believed, researchers show.

0 Comments

image: Implanted Trachea Going Strong

Implanted Trachea Going Strong

By | October 23, 2013

Five years after receiving a tissue-engineered airway, the 30-year-old Colombian patient is doing well, having experienced no immunological complications associated with the procedure.

0 Comments

image: Post-Publication Peer Review Mainstreamed

Post-Publication Peer Review Mainstreamed

By | October 22, 2013

The launch of PubMed Commons highlights the pros and cons of re-reviewing published papers. 

6 Comments

image: A Dire Air Pollution Warning

A Dire Air Pollution Warning

By | October 21, 2013

Contaminants in the air are officially carcinogens, according to the World Health Organization.

2 Comments

image: Opinion: Academic Waste

Opinion: Academic Waste

By | October 17, 2013

From funding to publishing, academic research needlessly burns through time and money.

3 Comments

image: Ketamine Alternative Shows Promise

Ketamine Alternative Shows Promise

By | October 17, 2013

Researchers show that lanicemine is an effective antidepressant without the adverse effects of the related hallucinogenic drug.

0 Comments

image: Opinion: Honorary Authorship Is Antiquated Etiquette

Opinion: Honorary Authorship Is Antiquated Etiquette

By | October 16, 2013

Though the practice may be well-intentioned, naming courtesy authors can hurt science and scientists.

3 Comments

image: Useless Peer Review?

Useless Peer Review?

By | October 15, 2013

A study shows that the methods by which scientists evaluate each other’s work are error-prone and poor at measuring merit.

3 Comments

image: Fake Paper Exposes Failed Peer Review

Fake Paper Exposes Failed Peer Review

By | October 6, 2013

The widespread acceptance of an atrocious manuscript, fabricated by an investigative journalist, reveals the near absence of quality at some journals.

2 Comments

Popular Now

  1. Unstructured Proteins Help Tardigrades Survive Desiccation
  2. What Budget Cuts Might Mean for US Science
    News Analysis What Budget Cuts Might Mean for US Science

    A look at the historical effects of downsized research funding suggests that the Trump administration’s proposed budget could hit early-career scientists the hardest.  

  3. Opinion: On “The Impact Factor Fallacy”
  4. Inflammation Drives Gut Bacteria Evolution
Business Birmingham