Science between evidence and illusion

The ever-increasing number of scientific publications lets the half-life of evidence appear shorter and shorter. In scientific research, evidence does not enjoy 100% certainty. Considering the variety of approaches, points of view and constructions with regard to the comprehensibility and perceptibility of evidence, systematic error in scientific studies is immanent. In general, evidence should be well-supported by repeated implementation studies rather than by a single falsified hypothesis in a stand-alone study. Ideally, the estimated probability of certainty should be specified regarding the accuracy of observations, measurements and calculations, and conclusions. A division into categories of certainty may be useful, ranging from obvious (observational studies) and proven (interventional studies) to evident (meta-analyses and systematic reviews). The term evidence as currently used in scientific reporting might provoke higher expectations regarding levels of certainty than are justified. Evidence and bias have to be seen in a complementary context.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Evidence
Published
2024-10-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.61505/evidence.2024.2.3.95
Primary Topic
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Science between evidence and illusion

Wolfgang Lederer
The Evidence
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
article

Science between evidence and illusion

Wolfgang Lederer
article en

Abstract

The ever-increasing number of scientific publications lets the half-life of evidence appear shorter and shorter. In scientific research, evidence does not enjoy 100% certainty. Considering the variety of approaches, points of view and constructions with regard to the comprehensibility and perceptibility of evidence, systematic error in scientific studies is immanent. In general, evidence should be well-supported by repeated implementation studies rather than by a single falsified hypothesis in a stand-alone study. Ideally, the estimated probability of certainty should be specified regarding the accuracy of observations, measurements and calculations, and conclusions. A division into categories of certainty may be useful, ranging from obvious (observational studies) and proven (interventional studies) to evident (meta-analyses and systematic reviews). The term evidence as currently used in scientific reporting might provoke higher expectations regarding levels of certainty than are justified. Evidence and bias have to be seen in a complementary context.

The EvidenceVol. 2(3)
Innsbruck Medical University (AT), Universität Innsbruck (AT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 71%
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Science between evidence and illusion — Wolfgang Lederer · The Evidence (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS