Advertisement
Mayo Clinic Proceedings Home

Flexibilization of Science, Cognitive Biases, and the COVID-19 Pandemic

      In the second week of March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was officially a pandemic. This occurred 10 weeks after China reported to the WHO a cluster of pneumonia cases. In the context of a pandemic, multiple pressures, such as fear of death and economic collapse, may align. This scenario creates a fertile ground for ingrained cognitive biases, thereby disturbing the systematic approach upon which science usually relies.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Mayo Clinic Proceedings
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Gautret P.
        • Lagier J.-C.
        • Parola P.
        • Hoang V.T.
        • Meddeb L.
        • Mailhe M.
        • et al.
        Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial.
        Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2020; 56: 105949
        • Mehra M.R.
        • Ruschitzka F.
        • Patel A.N.
        Retraction—hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis.
        Lancet. 2020; 395: 1820
        • Contopoulos-Ioannidis D.G.
        • Ntzani E.E.
        • Ioannidis J.P.A.
        Translation of highly promising basic science research into clinical applications.
        Am J Med. 2003; 114: 477-484
        • Ioannidis J.P.A.
        Why most published research findings are false.
        PLoS Med. 2005; 2: e124
        • Emerson G.B.
        • Warme W.J.
        • Wolf F.M.
        • Heckman J.D.
        • Brand R.A.
        • Leopold S.S.
        Testing for the presence of positive-outcome bias in peer review: a randomized controlled trial.
        Arch Intern Med. 2010; 170: 1934-1939
        • Nyhan B.
        • Reifler J.
        Does correcting myths about the flu vaccine work? An experimental evaluation of the effects of corrective information.
        Vaccine. 2015; 33: 459-464
        • Mahtani K.R.
        “Spin” in reports of clinical research.
        Evid Based Med. 2016; 21: 201-202
        • Boutron I.
        • Dutton S.
        • Ravaud P.
        • Altman D.G.
        Reporting and interpretation of randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant results for primary outcomes.
        JAMA. 2010; 303: 2058-2064
        • Yavchitz A.
        • Ravaud P.
        • Altman D.G.
        • Moher D.G.
        • Hrobjartsson
        • Lasserson T.
        • et al.
        A new classification of spin in systematic reviews and meta-analyses was developed and ranked according to the severity.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2016; 75: 56-65
        • Boutron I.
        • Altman D.G.
        • Hopewell S.
        • Vera-Badillo F.
        • Tannock I.
        • Ravaud P.
        Impact of spin in the abstracts of articles reporting results of randomized controlled trials in the field of cancer: The SPIIN randomized controlled trial.
        J Clin Oncol. 2014; 32: 4120-4126
        • Ministério da Saúde
        Orientações do Ministério da Saúde para Manuseio Medicamentoso Precoce de Pacientes com diagnóstico da COVID-19.
        (Published May 20, 2020. Accessed June 9, 2020)
        • Wu Z.
        • McGoogan J.M.
        Characteristics of and Important Lessons from the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreak in China: Summary of a Report of 72314 Cases from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention.
        JAMA - J Am Med Assoc. 2020; 323: 1239-1242