I was going to post that article too, but I dug into it (read the paper), and it is really just conversion of gene names (like SEPT5) in supplementary files. That was reported long ago as affecting some quantifications, but I would call it analytical errors as we have seen in the past. A bit of a tempest in a teapot, perhaps.
Ironic twist, the paper provides a supplementary file listing all the gene-name errors they found, posted as an Excel file. -Steve > On Aug 26, 2016, at 14:26 , Maxime Boissonneault > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi everyone, > Some interesting content to use about how to not do science correctly with a > computer.... > https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/08/26/an-alarming-number-of-scientific-papers-contain-excel-errors/ > > > Maxime Boissonneault > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss
