Kasper P Kepp

[Kasper P Kepp @kp_kepp]

Science Funding application: Tell us exactly what you will discover, when you will discover it, what it will cost, its value & how many papers it will produce. Make sure the font, margins & formatting are exactly right. Then press submit & hope to be among the lucky 10%.

[Retraction Watch @RetractionWatch]

"Some Australian research funding is now a lottery. And that’s actually good news."
https://t.co/Ce3tlAbG9p

[Jay Van Bavel, PhD @jayvanbavel]

The intellectual and societal cost of our collective obsession with publication count over impact is staggering. Curiosity is replaced by mass production, so much so that researchers are overwhelmed with the volume of published papers, described as the “strain on scientific publishing.”

If higher education wants to reverse course, institutions must confront the incentive structures that created this crisis. Three steps would meaningfully shift the culture:

Evaluate fewer papers, but more deeply. Promotion committees should assess a candidate’s top three to five publications, forcing reviewers to read the work rather than count papers and citations.

Broaden what counts as impact—especially teaching and research support. Institutions should formally weigh executive education leadership, research-teaching integration, creation of new or specialized courses, high-impact curricula, the ability to reach and shape large numbers of students, and the securing of grants or philanthropic gifts that enable consequential research alongside traditional research metrics.

Audit citation practices. Universities should monitor for citation cartels, editor self-citing and anomalous patterns increasingly penalized by indexing services.

https://t.co/d5WdQmAeCS

[The BMJ @bmj_latest]

The use of a surrogate endpoint in a clinical trial may allow faster approval of a novel treatment, but at the cost of increased uncertainty about treatment benefit.

This paper presents guidance for surrogate endpoint evaluation
https://t.co/O81v4e2B1M

[Alberto J Espay @AlbertoEspay]

Lecanemab improves amyloid biomarkers but worsens neuronal/synaptic biomarkers. Should we question whether successful amyloid removal improves the biology that matters most? My take on the new study: https://t.co/6SVRvY4lHY

[Kasper P Kepp @kp_kepp]

If we organize science as a competition with misguided measurement methods under misguided bureaucratic control, then we kill its lifeblood: independent, enthusiastic curiosity, creativity, cooperation, patience and quite a lot of randomness.

[Kasper P Kepp @kp_kepp]

In Saturday’s op-ed in Danish newspaper Kristeligt Dagblad, I explain why I decided to stop my career as university professor - a life that I once loved and devoted so much of my energy to.
https://t.co/ifMQsxos7F

[Kasper P Kepp @kp_kepp]

Numbers seem objective, so scientists and bureaucrats like them. The problem is that scientists understand their limitations and uncertainties. When numbers are used uncritically, almost religiously, to control people, they become downright dangerous.

[Richard Van Noorden @Richvn]

Which scientific publishers/journals are worst affected by fraudulent or dubious research papers, and which have done least to clean up their portfolio?
A science-integrity startup says it has answers - here's an exclusive look at the figures @Nature 🧵/1
https://t.co/yyvcWUg1Ro

[Elisabeth Bik @MicrobiomDigest]

The punishment for science misconduct is …. nothing. All these men are still running labs / paid professors.

[Misha Teplitskiy | Science of Science @MishaTeplitskiy]

Reasons authors give for not sharing data when their paper says "data available upon request"
https://t.co/OLrxgOLIlD

[Re-energising Your Career @career_re]

#AcademicTwitter 😂 #phdlife #phdvoice

[Charles Piller @cpiller]

My new investigation for @newsfromscience: Did a top @NIH official manipulate Alzheimer's/Parkinson’s research for decades? Neuroscientist Eliezer Masliah found to engage in scientific misconduct; 132 of his papers fall under suspicion
https://t.co/gF4fcjDipJ