Pings
-
8 Answers 4 Votes
How do you justify (or would you justify) a new research study to ensure it doesn’t unnecessarily duplicate previous work or repeat past methodological mistakes?
I’m currently working on a PhD thesis focused on Evidence-Based Research (EBR), particularly on how researchers use (or fail to use) prior evidence (similar studies), to justify and design new research. I’d love to hear real-world experiences, whether from preparing research proposals or evaluating them. Do you use any structured or unstructured method to be aware of all relevant prior research? How do you support your judgments (e.g., demonstrating that no prior studies exist, or that...
-
13 Answers 4 Votes
Impact of Food Regulation on Chronic Disease
To what extent do you believe strict governmental regulation of food safety and marketing could reduce the incidence of chronic diseases in the population? - Up to 30% - Around 50% - Up to 70% - Minimal effect - It depends on cultural factors
-
45 Answers 9 Votes
What are the biggest challenges facing your field of research?
1. Lack of funding 2. Difficulty in replicating studies 3. Difficulty in recruiting participants 4. Difficulty in obtaining necessary resources and equipment
-
Answer Accepted 6 Answers 7 Votes
Why do qualified researchers from low- and middle-income countries often miss out on international roles despite meeting all requirements and how can they improve their chances?
I’m interested in understanding the hidden barriers and practical steps they can take to strengthen their applications
-
8 Answers 0 Votes
What is the most important part of a scientific article? Let's approach this seriously!
I read a question asking what is the most important part of a scientific article. As far as I can see, we have all gone crazy. The most significant part of a scientific article is… simply ALL OF IT. By the way, nobody has commented on the REFERENCES. Or is a copy-paste enough?
-
13 Answers 1 Vote
How should irrelevant comment(s) from a peer reviewer be handled?
Some times an irrelevant comments is made on a peer review report based on which a paper is rejected and that makes the author very discouraging. Like "Proper discussion is not made why apple is red" while the paper is on lily flower. The answer could be any of the same a) The editorial board should take care of such comments and provide the full support to evaluate the paper a s per merit rather than rejection. b) The paper be rejected and resubmitted to the same or other Journal citing the...
-
Reviewing Results 10 Answers
Chemistry lab safety during pregnancy - what are your protocols? $75
SciPinion is seeking opinion and input regarding a situation in an organic chemistry teaching lab that was brought to us from a professor. One of their students recently shared the news that she was expecting a child, and asked if there were any concerns with her working with or handling lab materials. Our colleague reached out to another more experienced professor, and received little input besides that the student should avoid handling chemicals and just contribute through notes and...
-
3 Answers 1 Vote
Role of humanized immune system mice in to study the infectious and systemic inflammatory disease.
Whether the humanized immune system (HIS) mice help developing therapeutic interventions against infectious and inflammatory diseases? Whether HIS mice may revolutionize the translational biomedical research
-
Answer Accepted 6 Answers 7 Votes
Do recurring evaluations by research funders genuinely enhance research quality and societal impact, or do they merely create unnecessary administrative burdens?
Many research funders require periodic evaluations of projects to ensure accountability, monitor progress, and assess impact. While such evaluations can drive improvements in research design, transparency, and relevance, they can also consume significant time and resources. This raises the question of whether the benefits—such as higher-quality outputs and stronger societal contributions—outweigh the potential drawbacks, including administrative overload and reduced time for actual research.
-
14 Answers 0 Votes
Should a big research (e.g., PhD) be published as one comprehensive high-impact paper or several smaller, faster publications?
Should a big study perhaps a PhD student’s research be published as one comprehensive, high-impact paper or split into several smaller, focused publications? A single major paper can offer a cohesive, in-depth contribution with broader impact, but may delay dissemination. Multiple smaller papers can communicate findings more quickly and stimulate ongoing research, yet may lack the unified context of a larger work. What choice is the best - having a comprehensive paper in high impact journals...
Pings FAQ
What is a Ping?
A Ping is a single science-based question. The question comes from a fellow SciPinion Expert who is seeking input from the expert community. All participation in this service (i.e. asking or answering questions) is voluntary and anonymous if you prefer.
Can I post a Ping?
Yes, all SciPinion Experts are able to ask questions for the expert community to answer, provided you have Ping Credits. All Experts start with 3 Ping Credits (i.e., can ask 3 questions), and have the opportunity to earn more (e.g., by answering Pings from other experts, applying to panel opportunities).
Can I sponsor a Paid Ping?
Yes, please contact SciPinion if you would like to sponsor a Paid Ping.
What do I get for answering a Ping?
By answering a question from a fellow SciPinion Expert you earn 1 Ping Credit, which allows you to sponsor your own Ping (e.g., for every question you answer, you can ask your own question)
You also receive the satisfaction of helping your fellow experts and supporting the scientific community.