Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
It took courage, persistence, and dogged research to persuade journals and indifferent academia that a major piece of cancer research was desperately flawed – even though it was guiding treatment in clinical trials. Darrel Ince tells the story, and finds that the Duke problem was not a one-off.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Darrel Ince (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: