Flutterby™! : Let's look at it from this angle...

Re-analysis of clinical trial data can cchange conclusions.

“There is a real need for researchers to provide access to their raw data for others to analyze,” said John Ioannidis, MD, DSc, professor of medicine and director of the Stanford Prevention Research Center. “Without this access, and possibly incentives to perform this work, there is increasing lack of trust in whether the results of published, randomized trials are credible and can be taken at face value. The recent hot debates about whether oseltamivir works are only the tip of the iceberg in this crisis of confidence.”

Of note: Of the nearly 3,000 studies they looked at, 38 had sufficient data to re-analyze ("here's the conclusions we came to, but you don't get to look at our data"?), and the re-analysis of 13 of those came to a different conclusion than the original paper.