Biology subjects

Bik, E. M.

Publications and source records attributed to Bik, E. M..

4 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2018

Analysis and Correction of Inappropriate Image Duplication: The Molecular and Cellular Biology Experience

The present study analyzed 960 papers published in Molecular and Cellular Biology (MCB) from 2009-2016 and found 59 (6.1%) to contain inappropriately duplicated images. The 59 instances of inappropriate image duplication led to 42 corrections, 5 retractions and 12 instances in which no action was taken. Our experience suggests that the majority of inappropriate image duplications result from errors during figure preparation that can be remedied by correction. Nevertheless, ~10% of papers with inappropriate image duplications in MCB were retracted. If this proportion is representative, then as many as 35,000 papers in the literature are candidates for retraction due to image duplication. The resolution of inappropriate image duplication concerns after publication required an average of 6 h of journal staff time per published paper. MCB instituted a pilot program to screen images of accepted papers prior to publication that identified 12 manuscripts (14.5% out of 83) with image concerns in two months. The screening and correction of papers before publication required an average of 30 min of staff time per problematic paper. Image screening can identify papers with problematic images prior to publication, reduces post-publication problems and requires significantly less staff time than the correction of problems after publication.

scientific communication and education↗

bioRxiv2018

Measures of reproducibility in sampling and laboratory processing methods in high-throughput microbiome analysis

Microbial community analysis can be biased by multiple technical factors, such as storage conditions, DNA extraction, or amplification conditions. In a high-throughput laboratory that relies on samples obtained from thousands of different subjects, knowledge of the extent of subject-introduced sampling and storage variation on the outcome of the inferred microbiome, as well as the effect of laboratory-introduced variation caused by reagent batches, equipment, or operator on the consistency of these processes within the laboratory is paramount. Here, we analyzed the effect of sampling from different parts of the same stool specimen or on different consecutive days, as well as short-term storage of samples at different temperatures on microbiome profiles obtained by 16S rRNA gene amplification. Each of these factors had relatively little effect on the microbial composition. In addition, replicate amplification of 44 stool samples showed reproducible results. Finally, 363 independent replicate extractions and amplifications of a single human homogenized stool (HS) specimen showed reproducible results (average Lins correlation = 0.95), with little variation introduced by HS batch, operator, extraction equipment, or DNA sequencer. In all cases, variations between replicates were significantly smaller than those between individual samples; subject identity always was the largest determinant. We propose that homogenized stool specimens could be used as quality control to routinely monitor the laboratory process and to validate new methods.

microbiology↗

bioRxiv2017

A new sequencing-based women’s health assay combining self-sampling, HPV detection and genotyping, STI detection, and vaginal microbiome analysis

The composition of the vaginal microbiome, including both the presence of pathogens involved in sexually transmitted infections (STI) as well as commensal microbiota, has been shown to have important associations for a womans reproductive and general health. Currently, healthcare providers cannot offer comprehensive vaginal microbiome screening, but are limited to the detection of individual pathogens, such as high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV), the predominant cause of cervical cancer. There is no single test on the market that combines HPV, STI, and microbiome screening. Here, we describe a novel inclusive womens health assay that combines self-sampling with sequencing-based HPV detection and genotyping, vaginal microbiome analysis, and STI-associated pathogen detection. The assay includes genotyping and detection of 14 hrHPV types, 5 low-risk HPV types (lrHPV), as well as the relative abundance of 32 bacterial taxa of clinical importance, including Lactobacillus, Sneathia, Gardnerella, and 4 pathogens involved in STI, with high sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility. For each of these taxa, healthy ranges were determined in a group of 50 self-reported healthy women. The hrHPV portion of the test was evaluated against the Digene High-Risk HPV HC2 DNA test with vaginal samples obtained from 185 women. Results were concordant for 181/185 of the samples (overall agreement of 97.83%, Cohens kappa = 0.93), with sensitivity and specificity values of 94.74% and 98.64%, respectively. Two discrepancies were caused by the Digene assays known cross-reactivity with low-risk HPV types, while two additional samples were found to contain hrHPV not detected by Digene. This novel assay could be used to complement conventional cervical cancer screening, because its self-sampling format can expand access among women who would otherwise not participate, and because of its additional information about the composition of the vaginal microbiome and the presence of pathogens.

microbiology↗

bioRxiv2017

Why Do Scientists Fabricate And Falsify Data? A Matched-Control Analysis Of Papers Containing Problematic Image Duplications

It is commonly hypothesized that scientists are more likely to engage in data falsification and fabrication when they are subject to pressures to publish, when they are not restrained by forms of social control, when they work in countries lacking policies to tackle scientific misconduct, and when they are male. Evidence to test these hypotheses, however, is inconclusive due to the difficulties of obtaining unbiased data.\n\nHere we report a pre-registered test of these four hypotheses, conducted on papers that were identified in a previous study as containing problematic image duplications through a systematic screening of the journal PLoS ONE. Image duplications were classified into three categories based on their complexity, with category 1 being most likely to reflect unintentional error and category 3 being most likely to reflect intentional fabrication. Multiple parameters connected to the hypotheses above were tested with a matched-control paradigm, by collecting two controls for each paper containing duplications.\n\nCategory 1 duplications were mostly not associated with any of the parameters tested, in accordance with the assumption that these duplications were mostly not due to misconduct. Category 2 and 3, however, exhibited numerous statistically significant associations. Results of univariable and multivariable analyses support the hypotheses that academic culture, peer control, cash-based publication incentives and national misconduct policies might affect scientific integrity. Significant correlations between the risk of image duplication and individual publication rates or gender, however, were only observed in secondary and exploratory analyses.\n\nCountry-level parameters generally exhibited effects of larger magnitude than individual-level parameters, because a subset of countries was significantly more likely to produce problematic image duplications. Promoting good research practices in all countries should be a priority for the international research integrity agenda.

scientific communication and education↗