You may find more results for this query on our sister sites: 360Dx and Precision Oncology News.
The Guardian writes that the retraction last week of two COVID-19 papers may affect public trust in science.
The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine have retracted two COVID-19 papers due to concerns about the data used in their analyses.
The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine have issued expressions of concern regarding the data used in two COVID-19 papers, the New York Times reports.
A change in leadership could offer the New England Journal of Medicine the chance to re-make itself, write Retraction Watch's Adam Marcus and Ivan Oransky, at Stat News.
ProPublica writes that the New England Journal of Medicine may not be keeping up with the times.
By Turna Ray
Cepheid's Xpert MTB/RIF test received a vote of confidence for its ability to diagnose TB and rifampicin resistance in remote and resource-poor regions of the world, according to the results of a New England Journal of Medicine study.
Findings in a NEJM study this week challenged previously reported data that alleles in the CYP2C19 gene can limit how certain carriers of the polymorphisms respond to Plavix.
The Washington Post reports that the CDC's SARS-CoV-2 test issues reflect earlier ones it had with Zika virus testing.
NPR writes that even with thousands of new COVID-19 papers, each should be evaluated based on its own quality.
Researchers traced a gene cluster linked to COVID-19 severity to Neanderthals, the New York Times reports.
In PNAS this week: soil bacteria-derived small molecules affect centrosomal protein, microfluidics approach for capturing circulating tumor cells, and more.