@ioanaacristea
Associate Professor @Unipd | Affiliate @METRICStanford | Scholar @FulbrightPrgrm | #Metaresearch #Openscience #Psychotherapy #Trials | @ERC_Research DECOMPOSE https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101042701
RETRACTED FOR THE SECOND TIME: phony study on "biofield energy" treatment neurocritic.blogspot.com/2026/03/retr...
An update on the saga of a supernatural intervention published in peer-reviewed scientific journals cc: @retractionwatch.com
@dingdingpeng.the100.ci still a long way to go with causal inference though.
Everyone: I know about the mistakes. Don’t @me.
I already am struggling with 3 phrases about challenges of living abroad which is Hausaufgabe.
Hahaha, in the abstract? Ok, you win. But seriously one cannot make a 150 words abstract that makes sense
Also curious about the lit searches (genuinely). I never tried anything bespoke but the times I tried with Claude, what it found was subpar. Is there something specific you use? Also true that I avoid giving anything written by me to LLMs, so maybe that might have made searches better
Just here to say abstracts should start at 300 words.
Is this result mechanistically plausible? (I know nothing about this field)
In short, don’t dichotomize. It just gives the illusion of clarity, while losing information.
Really curious what tenant of modern parenting has made it so that your kid wants you and me to exchange phone numbers to play with my kids, but you are like ‘oh it’s not necessary, we’ll see each other around’. Privacy? Attachment? Sheer insanity?
The very same people (I have two big names of open science in mind, add their fans) who literally predicted 5-6 years ago that researchers who don’t code will be out of science (haha) are now predicting LLMs will be doing most of the science in 5 years. Cassandra, something’s gotta give.
New paper, on a worrying trend in meta-science: the practice of anonymising datasets on, e.g., published articles. We argue that this is at odds with norms established in research synthesis, explore arguments for anonymisation, provide counterpoints, and demonstrate implications and epistemic costs.
What is the best reporting guideline acronym? ROB-ME by @mjpages.bsky.social gets my preliminary vote.
Any other good ones, #AIMOS2025?
Yeah it’s the legal status I wish did not matter…sorry I was just extra annoyed at Oster
Can we for the love of God start calling it partnership? Signed the not married in long-term couples
Oh finally. We can like many things about Denmark, and still dislike their vaccination model. We have a more comprehensive schedule in Italy. Thank God.
Mesmerizing. You cannot watch this and remain unmoved.
My favorite genre of Epstein emails are powerful people emailing WITH JEFFREY EPSTEIN about how MeToo has gone too far and the woke mob must be stopped.
Same for me with German, which I studied in high school and after! Aargh! Can I blame it on having small kids? Yes
And modestly I am proud of myself that without any substantial causal inference training (on my list this year along with relearning German, learning French and Gen alpha…for now) I intuitively thought of many of these limitations. And some designs (RCTs) to me should only have robustness analyses
Data sharing psychos= crafting an elaborate data sharing all while knowing full well you won’t share
Exactly. I think John actually did a study on this. Some just say data sharing: none. Really useful policy
Ahaha what do you mean? Jama journals do not mandate data sharing, they mandate a data sharing “statement”. (See what I did there?)
Did he ever add the other 7 messages or what is it we call tweets here?
Probably competition from MDPI 🤣
But data is available from the authors upon reasonable request. For a meta-research paper this is simply ridiculous
Honestly, read our paper more
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35623542/
TFW you reply to all but it was the wrong all including the person who should not have read the mail. 😐
Academics vying for a spot in Epstein‘s world. There are so many. I feel the need to make a thread, so I don’t keep confusing them. 1/
It absolutely baffles me that in America high-profile professors at the top higher-education institutions (before cuts and anything) would secure funding by literally courting a millionaire sexual predator. How did you declare that funding on submissions again?
Can you give me some links of who is saying similar? (Private). Because I think I am not seeing the whole story. For sure one of the OS tzars blocked me but I don’t think it’s him/just him.
Who knew the real sociopaths were all studying morality and social behavior
