Improving Validation Practices in “Omics” Research

Top Cited Papers

2 December 2011

journal article
perspective
Published by American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in Science

Vol. 334 (6060) , 1230-1232
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1211811

Abstract

“Omics” research poses acute challenges regarding how to enhance validation practices and eventually the utility of this rich information. Several strategies may be useful, including routine replication, public data and protocol availability, funding incentives, reproducibility rewards or penalties, and targeted repeatability checks.

Keywords

This publication has 20 references indexed in Scilit:

Temporal Trends in Results Availability from Genome-Wide Association Studies
PLoS Genetics, 2011
Public Availability of Published Research Data in High-Impact Journals
PLOS ONE, 2011
Biomarker studies: a call for a comprehensive biomarker study registry
Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology, 2011
An empirical assessment of validation practices for molecular classifiers
Briefings in Bioinformatics, 2011
Proteomics Research to Discover Markers: What Can We Learn from Netflix®?
Clinical Chemistry, 2010
A HUPO test sample study reveals common problems in mass spectrometry–based proteomics
Nature Methods, 2009
The Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) initiative: methods of the EGAPP Working Group
Genetics in Medicine, 2009
Replicating genotype–phenotype associations
Nature, 2007
Critical Review of Published Microarray Studies for Cancer Outcome and Guidelines on Statistical Analysis and Reporting
JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2007
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
PLoS Medicine, 2005