Three journals raise doubts on validity of Canadian studies

doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7431.67

BMJ 2004;328:67 (10 January), doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7431.67

News

Three journals raise doubts on validity of Canadian studies

Caroline White

London

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Suspicions about the validity of research by Professor RanjitKumar Chandra, a prominent Canadian researcher, have been raisedby three journals, including the BMJ.

The latest concern, in an editorial and a letter in the Novemberissue of Nutrition ( 2003;19: 955-6 and 976-80)[Medline], question researchpublished in that journal by Professor Chandra in September 2001 (17: 709-12).

The Nutrition study was a randomised, blind, placebo controlledtrial. It showed that a specific multivitamin and mineral supplementcould improve cognitive function in people aged over 65 years.Professor Chandra, who was the sole author, concluded that thesupplement might delay the onset of Alzheimer's disease.

The original paper and the most recent letter and editorialquestioning its validity have attracted considerable media attention.

The BMJ's statistical reviewer concluded that the data had "allthe hallmarks of being entirely invented."

The 2001 paper in Nutrition is . . . [Full text of this article]

-->
Add to CiteULike CiteULike Add to Complore Complore Add to Connotea Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us Add to Digg Digg Add to Reddit Reddit Add to StumbleUpon StumbleUpon Add to Technorati Technorati What's this?

Relevant Articles

Investigating allegations of scientific misconduct: Jane Smith and Fiona Godlee
BMJ 2005 331: 245-246. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Investigating the previous studies of a fraudulent author: Richard Smith
BMJ 2005 331: 288-291. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Validity of Canadian studies: Author's response: Ranjit K Chandra
BMJ 2004 328: 465. [Extract] [Full Text]

Validity of Canadian studies: Response of editor of BMJ: Richard Smith
BMJ 2004 328: 465. [Extract] [Full Text]

Validity of Canadian studies: Response of editor in chief of Nutrition: Michael M Meguid
BMJ 2004 328: 465. [Extract] [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

Savy, M., Edmond, K., Fine, P. E. M., Hall, A., Hennig, B. J., Moore, S. E., Mulholland, K., Schaible, U., Prentice, A. M. (2009). Landscape Analysis of Interactions between Nutrition and Vaccine Responses in Children. J. Nutr. 139: 2154S-2218S [Abstract] [Full text]
Smith, J., Godlee, F. (2005). Investigating allegations of scientific misconduct. BMJ 331: 245-246 [Full text]
Smith, R. (2005). Investigating the previous studies of a fraudulent author. BMJ 331: 288-291 [Full text]
Vollset, S. E., Ueland, P. M. (2005). B vitamins and cognitive function: do we need more and larger trials?. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 81: 951-952 [Full text]
(2005). In brief. BMJ 330: 556-556 [Full text]
Chandra, R. K (2004). Validity of Canadian studies: Author's response. BMJ 328: 465-465 [Full text]
Smith, R. (2004). Validity of Canadian studies: Response of editor of BMJ. BMJ 328: 465-465 [Full text]
Meguid, M. M (2004). Validity of Canadian studies: Response of editor in chief of Nutrition. BMJ 328: 465-465 [Full text]

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Nutritional supplementation trials: The MAVIS Trial Group
bmj.com, 16 Jan 2004 [Full text]
How and what to investigate: Seth D. Roberts, et al.
bmj.com, 18 Jan 2004 [Full text]
Evidence in an Evidence Based Health Care. The Canadian Connection: Ram B Singh
bmj.com, 20 Jan 2004 [Full text]
Nutrient Supplements and Health: Ranjit K. Chandra
bmj.com, 26 Jan 2004 [Full text]
Contents of News Reports Should be Verified Before Publication: Karl F Bergmann
bmj.com, 24 Jan 2004 [Full text]
Every scientific evidence is not always fact: the Canadian studies: Jagdish P Sharma
bmj.com, 25 Jan 2004 [Full text]
The BMJ's continuing doubts on the work of Professor Chandra: Richard Smith
bmj.com, 26 Jan 2004 [Full text]
Irreconcilable Differences: Joseph . C . Obi
bmj.com, 30 Jan 2004 [Full text]
A Compleat Physician-Scientist: Pooja Gupta
bmj.com, 26 Jan 2004 [Full text]
There is Still Time for Meeting and Discussion and Apology.: Ram B Singh
bmj.com, 27 Jan 2004 [Full text]
A Solution for the Debate: Bum Suk Kim
bmj.com, 28 Jan 2004 [Full text]
A Journalist's Recommendation to BMJ: Gillian E Mahoney
bmj.com, 28 Jan 2004 [Full text]
Concerns about the data: Susan D Shenkin, et al.
bmj.com, 28 Jan 2004 [Full text]
There is Still Time for Meeting,Discussion and Apology;Revised.: Ram B Singh
bmj.com, 29 Jan 2004 [Full text]
Science or politics: Rakesh Sharma
bmj.com, 29 Jan 2004 [Full text]
News and Nutrition: Rakesh Sharma
bmj.com, 30 Jan 2004 [Full text]
dr white should be kind enough to resign: drmanoj saxena
bmj.com, 9 Feb 2004 [Full text]
Those accountable for the contents of BMJ should apologize: Karl F Bergmann
bmj.com, 9 Feb 2004 [Full text]
Chandra should present himself to the Memorial University of Newfoundland for a full inquiry: Richard Smith
bmj.com, 10 Feb 2004 [Full text]
Re: The BMJ's continuing doubts on the work of Professor Chandra: Wasim Maziak
bmj.com, 10 Feb 2004 [Full text]
Response from the Editor-in-Chief of Nutrition: Michael M Meguid
bmj.com, 11 Feb 2004 [Full text]
Dr Chandra- please provide clear answers to the questions raised: Alan Shenkin
bmj.com, 18 Feb 2004 [Full text]
Any one who preaches a gospel should also practice it: Ranjit K Chandra
bmj.com, 19 Feb 2004 [Full text]
Re: Contents of News Reports Should be Verified Before Publication: Shiv Kumar, et al.
bmj.com, 24 Feb 2004 [Full text]
Re: Every scientific evidence is not always fact: the Canadian studies: Shiv Kumar, et al.
bmj.com, 4 Mar 2004 [Full text]
Have you decided to Spoil the Image of BMJ?: Ram B Singh
bmj.com, 20 Feb 2004 [Full text]
Response to Dr. Chandra: Saul Sternberg, et al.
bmj.com, 29 Feb 2004 [Full text]
Re: Have you decided to Spoil the Image of BMJ?: Dr.Devan. P.P.
bmj.com, 6 May 2004 [Full text]