Letters
Sharing raw data
Author’s reply to Goldacre
BMJ 2016; 352 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i889 (Published 17 February 2016) Cite this as: BMJ 2016;352:i889
- Nick Freemantle, professor of clinical epidemiology and biostatistics
- Department of Primary Care and Population Health, UCL Medical School, London NW3 2PF, UK
- nicholas.freemantle{at}ucl.ac.uk
Goldacre’s suggestion that we should share the analytic code is bad science for two reasons.1
Firstly, replication is key to scientific activity. We asked a senior colleague to review our two published papers2 3 (the results in our paper in The BMJ had previously been published2). He reported …
Log in
Log in using your username and password
Log in through your institution
Subscribe from £184 *
Subscribe and get access to all BMJ articles, and much more.
* For online subscription
Access this article for 1 day for:
£50 / $60/ €56 (excludes VAT)
You can download a PDF version for your personal record.