There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field. In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias. In this essay, I discuss the implications of these problems for the conduct and interpretation of research.

Why most published research findings are false

Haemolytic uraemic syndrome.

The Summary of Notifiable Infectious Diseases and Conditions - United States, 2015 (hereafter referred to as the summary) contains the official statistics, in tabular and graphical form, for the reported occurrence of nationally notifiable infectious diseases and conditions in the United States for 2015. Unless otherwise noted, data are final totals for 2015 reported as of June 30, 2016. These statistics are collected and compiled from reports sent by U.S. state and territories, New York City, and District of Columbia health departments to the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS), which is operated by CDC in collaboration with the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE). This summary is available at https://www.cdc.gov/MMWR/MMWR_nd/index.html. This site also includes summary publications from previous years.

/pdf/summary-of-notifiable-infectious-diseases-and-conditions-3wlh1e9c50.pdf

Summary of Notifiable Infectious Diseases and Conditions - United States, 2015.

The severity of human infection by one of the many Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) is determined by a number of factors: the bacterial genome, the capacity of human societies to prevent foodborne epidemics, the medical condition of infected patients (in particular their hydration status, often compromised by severe diarrhea), and by our capacity to devise new therapeutic approaches, most specifically to combat the bacterial virulence factors, as opposed to our current strategies that essentially aim to palliate organ deficiencies. The last major outbreak in 2011 in Germany, which killed more than 50 people in Europe, was evidence that an effective treatment was still lacking. Herein, we review the current knowledge of STEC virulence, how societies organize the prevention of human disease, and how physicians treat (and, hopefully, will treat) its potentially fatal complications. In particular, we focus on STEC-induced hemolytic and uremic syndrome (HUS), where the intrusion of toxins inside endothelial cells results in massive cell death, activation of the coagulation within capillaries, and eventually organ failure.

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02486805/document

Shiga Toxin-Associated Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome: A Narrative Review.

Background Antibiotic administration to individuals with Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) infection remains controversial. We assessed if antibiotic administration to individuals with STEC infection is associated with development of hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS). Methods The analysis included studies published up to 29 April 2015, that provided data from patients (1) with STEC infection, (2) who received antibiotics, (3) who developed HUS, and (4) for whom data reported timing of antibiotic administration in relation to HUS. Risk of bias was assessed; strength of evidence was adjudicated. HUS was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes restricted the analysis to low-risk-of-bias studies employing commonly used HUS criteria. Pooled estimates of the odds ratio (OR) were obtained using random-effects models. Results Seventeen reports and 1896 patients met eligibility; 8 (47%) studies were retrospective, 5 (29%) were prospective cohort, 3 (18%) were case-control, and 1 was a trial. The pooled OR, including all studies, associating antibiotic administration and development of HUS was 1.33 (95% confidence interval [CI], .89-1.99; I(2) = 42%). The repeat analysis including only studies with a low risk of bias and those employing an appropriate definition of HUS yielded an OR of 2.24 (95% CI, 1.45-3.46; I(2) = 0%). Conclusions Overall, use of antibiotics was not associated with an increased risk of developing HUS; however, after excluding studies at high risk of bias and those that did not employ an acceptable definition of HUS, there was a significant association. Consequently, the use of antibiotics in individuals with STEC infections is not recommended.

Shiga Toxin-Producing Escherichia coli Infection, Antibiotics, and Risk of Developing Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis

Postdiarrheal hemolytic uremic syndrome in United States children: clinical spectrum and predictors of in-hospital death.

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Josh Rounds

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Postdiarrheal hemolytic uremic syndrome in United States children: clinical spectrum and predictors of in-hospital death.