Tweet is about researchers not writing literature reviews which reflect the scientific consensus and a balanced review of different perspectives, rather they are cherry picking papers which affirm their own view (i.e., confirmation and selection bias)

University of Michigan - Ann Arbor

"In the age of covid, I've seen a few literature reviews that amount to "a list of all the papers that say I'm right". Gentle reminder: the goal of a literature review is to determine the state of the scientific CONSENSUS through a BALANCED survey of ALL available evidence."

@kareem_carr


Kareeem points the need to show both sides to the argument using literature review to come to a consensus. 



Analysis of Kareem Carr tweet

Preprint papers need to be supplemented with a rapid peer review process. A rapid peer review mechanism should be provided to address problematic literature reviews. This mechanism should allow reviewers to link to concepts, references, or authors which should be included in the literature review. 

Hypothesis 2 (solution) of Kareem Carr tweet



Without a peer review process (which is often the case for preprints), papers can be published with lit reviews that do not provide a holistic and balanced review of a topic and the current debates surrounding that topic. A one-sided or incomplete lit review is easier to conduct, and it allows the author to only select papers which reinforce their argument/conclusion.

Learn Before

Related