medical research org nyt

Medical research org. Crossword Clue

Medical research org Crossword Clue Answers are listed below. Did you came up with a solution that did not solve the clue? No worries we keep a close eye on all the clues and update them regularly with the correct answers.

MEDICAL RESEARCH ORG Crossword Solution

Medical research org. - NYT Crossword Clue

Hello everyone! Thank you visiting our website, here you will be able to find all the answers for New York Times Crossword Game (NYT). The New York Times Crossword is the new wonderful word game developed by New York Times, known by his best puzzle word games on the android and apple store. The main idea behind the New York Times Crossword Puzzles is to make them harder and harder each passing day- world’s best crossword builders and editors collaborate to make this possible. Monday’s crossword is always the easiest of them all and then they get more and more sophisticated as the week goes by. The most difficult puzzle is published on Sunday. Access to hundreds of puzzles, right on your Android device, so play or review your crosswords when you want, wherever you want! Keep your mind sharp with word games from The New York Times. Free to download, the app offers puzzles for every level so you can steadily improve your skills every day. We post crossword answers daily, so please bookmark us and visit our website often. The answers are divided into several pages to keep it clear. This page contains answers to puzzle Medical research org..

Medical research org.

The answer to this question:

More answers from this crossword:

• Airer of "Orphan Black" and "Almost Royal"
• Foreign dishes?
• Dislikes intensely
• Ginormous quantities
• ___ Reville, Alfred Hitchcock's wife and collaborator
• Jocular response to "How did you know?!"
• Baby rabbit
• Presented in rows and columns
• Home of Colbert and Corden
• Cobbler's job
• Craft for J.F.K. in W.W. II
• Org. behind the magazine America's 1st Freedom
• Fuel holder

Medical research org. NYT Crossword

Welcome all users to the only page that has all information and answers, needed to complete NYT Crossword game. This webpage with NYT Crossword Medical research org. answers is the only source you need to quickly skip the challenging level. This game was created by a The New York Times Company team that created a lot of great games for Android and iOS. Source Link: Medical research org. NYT Crossword . 

NYT Crossword July 9 2023 Answers

Medical research org. NYT Crossword Answers:

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Crossword Tips

Clue: Medical research org.

Referring crossword puzzle answers, likely related crossword puzzle clues.

• Biomedical research agcy.
• Medical research agcy.
• Med. research agency
• Govt. medical agency
• Biomedical research org.
• Research org.
• Med. research org.
• Fed. biomedical research agcy.
• U.S. medical research agcy.
• Fed. medical research group

Recent usage in crossword puzzles:

• Universal Crossword - Sept. 5, 2022
• Universal Crossword - May 9, 2022
• LA Times - April 15, 2022
• Universal Crossword - Aug. 13, 2021
• LA Times - May 27, 2021
• LA Times - Jan. 27, 2020
• Universal Crossword - Sept. 7, 2019
• New York Times - June 9, 2019
• New York Times - Nov. 23, 2018
• Sheffer - Dec. 4, 2017
• LA Times - May 14, 2017
• LA Times - Aug. 13, 2015
• Sheffer - June 30, 2012
• LA Times - April 26, 2011
• Newsday - March 31, 2010
• New York Times - March 27, 2010
• New York Times - April 29, 2009
• LA Times - Aug. 1, 2008
• Universal Crossword - March 16, 2008
• New York Times - May 28, 2006

Medical research org LA Times Crossword Clue

Looks like you need some help with LA Times Crossword game. Yes, this game is challenging and sometimes very difficult. That is why we are here to help you. That is why this website is made for – to provide you help with Medical research org LA Times crossword clue answers. It also has additional information like tips, useful tricks, cheats, etc. The team that named Los Angeles Times, which has developed a lot of great other games and add this game to the Google Play and Apple stores.

Every child can play this game, but far not everyone can complete whole level set by their own. You should be genius in order not to stuck. When you will meet with hard levels, you will need to find published on our website Medical research org crossword clue LA Times solutions.

LA Times Crossword for sure will get some additional updates. Don’t worry, we will immediately add new answers as soon as we could. In order not to forget, just add our website to your list of favorites.

Want answers to other levels, then see them on the LA Times Crossword April 15 2022 answers page. 

The Answer for Medical research org LA Times Crossword is:

Usage in crosswords.

• NYT Crossword July 9 2023
• NYT Crossword December 2 2022
• LA Times Crossword May 27 2021
• LA Times Crossword January 27 2020
• NYT Crossword June 9 2019
• NYT Crossword November 23 2018
• LA Times Crossword May 14 2017
• NYT Crossword March 27 2010
• NYT Crossword April 29 2009

Other April 15 2022 LA Times Crossword Answers

• Ken who directed many “This Is Us” episodes LA Times Crossword Clue
• Pen output LA Times Crossword Clue
• Nursery sight LA Times Crossword Clue
• Night sch. subject LA Times Crossword Clue
• Stable area LA Times Crossword Clue
• Like some ice cream holders LA Times Crossword Clue
• When many plan to take off: Abbr. LA Times Crossword Clue
• Need something warm and fuzzy? LA Times Crossword Clue
• French menu preposition LA Times Crossword Clue
• Ruhr refusals LA Times Crossword Clue

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Medical research org. nyt crossword clue

This is the answer of the Nyt crossword clue Medical research org. featured on Nyt puzzle grid of “07 09 2023”, created by Christina Iverson and edited by Will Shortz .

The solution is quite difficult, we have been there like you, and we used our database to provide you the needed solution to pass to the next clue.

Medical research org. Answer :

Definitely, there may be another solutions for Medical research org. on another crossword grid, if you find one of these, please send it to us and we will enjoy adding it to our database.

If you need more crossword clue answers from the today’s new york times puzzle , please follow this link

Best Wishes.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

Subject of some medical research … or a description of this puzzle’s theme? NYT Crossword

Subject of some medical research or a description of this puzzles theme Crossword Clue NYT The NYTimes Crossword is a classic crossword puzzle. Both the main and the mini crosswords are published daily and published all the solutions of those puzzles for you. Two or more clue answers mean that the clue has appeared multiple times throughout the years.

SUBJECT OF SOME MEDICAL RESEARCH OR A DESCRIPTION OF THIS PUZZLES THEME Nytimes Crossword Clue Answer

  This clue was last seen on NYTimes March 02, 2023 Puzzle . If you are done solving this clue take a look at the other clues found on today's puzzle in case you may need help with another. Before each clue, you have its number and orientation on the puzzle for easier navigation.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

More Studies by Columbia Cancer Researchers Are Retracted

The studies, pulled because of copied data, illustrate the sluggishness of scientific publishers to address serious errors, experts said.

By Benjamin Mueller

Scientists in a prominent cancer lab at Columbia University have now had four studies retracted and a stern note added to a fifth accusing it of “severe abuse of the scientific publishing system,” the latest fallout from research misconduct allegations recently leveled against several leading cancer scientists.

A scientific sleuth in Britain last year uncovered discrepancies in data published by the Columbia lab, including the reuse of photos and other images across different papers. The New York Times reported last month that a medical journal in 2022 had quietly taken down a stomach cancer study by the researchers after an internal inquiry by the journal found ethics violations.

Despite that study’s removal, the researchers — Dr. Sam Yoon, chief of a cancer surgery division at Columbia University’s medical center, and Changhwan Yoon, a more junior biologist there — continued publishing studies with suspicious data. Since 2008, the two scientists have collaborated with other researchers on 26 articles that the sleuth, Sholto David, publicly flagged for misrepresenting experiments’ results.

One of those articles was retracted last month after The Times asked publishers about the allegations. In recent weeks, medical journals have retracted three additional studies, which described new strategies for treating cancers of the stomach, head and neck. Other labs had cited the articles in roughly 90 papers.

A major scientific publisher also appended a blunt note to the article that it had originally taken down without explanation in 2022. “This reuse (and in part, misrepresentation) of data without appropriate attribution represents a severe abuse of the scientific publishing system,” it said .

Still, those measures addressed only a small fraction of the lab’s suspect papers. Experts said the episode illustrated not only the extent of unreliable research by top labs, but also the tendency of scientific publishers to respond slowly, if at all, to significant problems once they are detected. As a result, other labs keep relying on questionable work as they pour federal research money into studies, allowing errors to accumulate in the scientific record.

“For every one paper that is retracted, there are probably 10 that should be,” said Dr. Ivan Oransky, co-founder of Retraction Watch, which keeps a database of 47,000-plus retracted studies. “Journals are not particularly interested in correcting the record.”

Columbia’s medical center declined to comment on allegations facing Dr. Yoon’s lab. It said the two scientists remained at Columbia and the hospital “is fully committed to upholding the highest standards of ethics and to rigorously maintaining the integrity of our research.”

The lab’s web page was recently taken offline. Columbia declined to say why. Neither Dr. Yoon nor Changhwan Yoon could be reached for comment. (They are not related.)

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, where the scientists worked when much of the research was done, is investigating their work.

The Columbia scientists’ retractions come amid growing attention to the suspicious data that undergirds some medical research. Since late February, medical journals have retracted seven papers by scientists at Harvard’s Dana-Farber Cancer Institute . That followed investigations into data problems publicized by Dr. David , an independent molecular biologist who looks for irregularities in published images of cells, tumors and mice, sometimes with help from A.I. software.

The spate of misconduct allegations has drawn attention to the pressures on academic scientists — even those, like Dr. Yoon, who also work as doctors — to produce heaps of research.

Strong images of experiments’ results are often needed for those studies. Publishing them helps scientists win prestigious academic appointments and attract federal research grants that can pay dividends for themselves and their universities.

Dr. Yoon, a robotic surgery specialist noted for his treatment of stomach cancers, has helped bring in nearly $5 million in federal research money over his career.

The latest retractions from his lab included articles from 2020 and 2021 that Dr. David said contained glaring irregularities . Their results appeared to include identical images of tumor-stricken mice, despite those mice supposedly having been subjected to different experiments involving separate treatments and types of cancer cells.

The medical journal Cell Death & Disease retracted two of the latest studies, and Oncogene retracted the third. The journals found that the studies had also reused other images, like identical pictures of constellations of cancer cells.

The studies Dr. David flagged as containing image problems were largely overseen by the more senior Dr. Yoon. Changhwan Yoon, an associate research scientist who has worked alongside Dr. Yoon for a decade, was often a first author, which generally designates the scientist who ran the bulk of the experiments.

Kun Huang, a scientist in China who oversaw one of the recently retracted studies, a 2020 paper that did not include the more senior Dr. Yoon, attributed that study’s problematic sections to Changhwan Yoon. Dr. Huang, who made those comments this month on PubPeer, a website where scientists post about studies, did not respond to an email seeking comment.

But the more senior Dr. Yoon has long been made aware of problems in research he published alongside Changhwan Yoon: The two scientists were notified of the removal in January 2022 of their stomach cancer study that was found to have violated ethics guidelines.

Research misconduct is often pinned on the more junior researchers who conduct experiments. Other scientists, though, assign greater responsibility to the senior researchers who run labs and oversee studies, even as they juggle jobs as doctors or administrators.

“The research world’s coming to realize that with great power comes great responsibility and, in fact, you are responsible not just for what one of your direct reports in the lab has done, but for the environment you create,” Dr. Oransky said.

In their latest public retraction notices, medical journals said that they had lost faith in the results and conclusions. Imaging experts said some irregularities identified by Dr. David bore signs of deliberate manipulation, like flipped or rotated images, while others could have been sloppy copy-and-paste errors.

The little-noticed removal by a journal of the stomach cancer study in January 2022 highlighted some scientific publishers’ policy of not disclosing the reasons for withdrawing papers as long as they have not yet formally appeared in print. That study had appeared only online.

Roland Herzog, the editor of the journal Molecular Therapy, said that editors had drafted an explanation that they intended to publish at the time of the article’s removal. But Elsevier, the journal’s parent publisher, advised them that such a note was unnecessary, he said.

Only after the Times article last month did Elsevier agree to explain the article’s removal publicly with the stern note. In an editorial this week , the Molecular Therapy editors said that in the future, they would explain the removal of any articles that had been published only online.

But Elsevier said in a statement that it did not consider online articles “to be the final published articles of record.” As a result, company policy continues to advise that such articles be removed without an explanation when they are found to contain problems. The company said it allowed editors to provide additional information where needed.

Elsevier, which publishes nearly 3,000 journals and generates billions of dollars in annual revenue , has long been criticized for its opaque removals of online articles.

Articles by the Columbia scientists with data discrepancies that remain unaddressed were largely distributed by three major publishers: Elsevier, Springer Nature and the American Association for Cancer Research. Dr. David alerted many journals to the data discrepancies in October.

Each publisher said it was investigating the concerns. Springer Nature said investigations take time because they can involve consulting experts, waiting for author responses and analyzing raw data.

Dr. David has also raised concerns about studies published independently by scientists who collaborated with the Columbia researchers on some of their recently retracted papers. For example, Sandra Ryeom, an associate professor of surgical sciences at Columbia, published an article in 2003 while at Harvard that Dr. David said contained a duplicated image . As of 2021, she was married to the more senior Dr. Yoon, according to a mortgage document from that year.

A medical journal appended a formal notice to the article last week saying “appropriate editorial action will be taken” once data concerns had been resolved. Dr. Ryeom said in a statement that she was working with the paper’s senior author on “correcting the error.”

Columbia has sought to reinforce the importance of sound research practices. Hours after the Times article appeared last month, Dr. Michael Shelanski, the medical school’s senior vice dean for research, sent an email to faculty members titled “Research Fraud Accusations — How to Protect Yourself.” It warned that such allegations, whatever their merits, could take a toll on the university.

“In the months that it can take to investigate an allegation,” Dr. Shelanski wrote, “funding can be suspended, and donors can feel that their trust has been betrayed.”

Benjamin Mueller reports on health and medicine. He was previously a U.K. correspondent in London and a police reporter in New York. More about Benjamin Mueller

share this!

March 26, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

peer-reviewed publication

trusted source

Coral research finds bleaching impedes reproduction and hinders recovery

by Australian Institute of Marine Science

Bleaching can suppress reproduction in a common coral species found in the Great Barrier Reef, hampering future reef replenishment, new research led by the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) and James Cook University (JCU) has identified.

The research on populations of a branching stony coral (Acropora millepora) in Woppaburra sea Country of the Keppel Islands near Yeppoon, highlights the importance of overlooked impacts of bleaching events and how they can impede recovery.

The research is published as aerial surveys undertaken by AIMS and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) have confirmed a fifth mass coral bleaching event since 2016 unfolding across the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. The work is published in the journal Coral Reefs .

Aerial surveys over the Keppel Islands in February observed extensive bleaching in nearshore areas consistent with increased sea surface temperatures and accumulated heat exposure in the wider southern region. In-water surveys conducted by AIMS are continuing in order to assess the severity of the bleaching.

Lead author Nico Briggs said his study found a 21% decrease in the reproductive output of Acropora millepora despite apparent recovery and low mortality after the 2020 mass bleaching event.

"Coral bleaching isn't always a death sentence for every coral. Corals can and do recover if stress inducing conditions subside. But our research shows there is a price to pay for recovery in terms of a coral's reproductive capacity, which is a critical driver of post-disturbance replenishment on coral reefs," Mr. Briggs said.

"We are seeing more frequent and severe bleaching events driven by climate change on the Great Barrier Reef and reefs worldwide. Our findings add to the mounting evidence that surviving coral populations are facing an increasingly uphill battle for recovery, in part due to sublethal impacts of bleaching events."

Mr. Briggs and his co-authors collected samples from almost 100 Acropora millepora colonies that were known to have bleached in the 2020 event and survived. The samples were collected six months after the bleaching and just before the annual coral spawning event in late October.

In dissecting the samples, the scientists found the number eggs produced within coral polyps decreased by 21% in colonies that had bleached severely, despite visual recovery, or return of the corals' color.

Recent in-water work by AIMS scientists included collecting samples from these corals to understand how the colonies have responded to this latest bleaching. More samples will be collected prior to the annual coral spawning later in the year.

Co-author Dr. Cathie Page said understanding how bleaching affects coral reproduction is a vital step towards improving predictions of reef trajectories under a warming climate.

"We know that the corals in Woppaburra sea Country are tough and resilient. There was little mortality after the 2020 bleaching event, despite these corals being exposed to accumulated heat stress that often results in mortality," she said.

"Their resilience is partly to do with environmental conditions in the region, with tides and currents helping to reduce water temperatures, provide sun protection and deliver extra food. But as this research shows, they paid a price for their recovery.

"The impact of bleaching on reproduction is likely to vary among coral species. Understanding this will help us to know what these reefs may look like in five to 10 years time, helping us to target interventions."

Mr. Briggs added the paper also highlighted the importance of a multi-faceted approach to helping coral reefs under a changing climate.

"Typical assessments of coral health after a bleaching event consist of surveys to determine how much coral lived or died, but these surveys miss longer-term impacts to health, such as impacts to reproduction and growth.

"The best chance for coral reefs to persist into the future requires a strong reduction in global greenhouse emissions to stabilize temperatures, best practice management of local pressures, and the development of innovative interventions to help boost climate tolerance and resilience for coral reefs," he said.

Journal information: Coral Reefs

Provided by Australian Institute of Marine Science

Explore further

Feedback to editors

AI improves monsoon rainfall predictions

8 hours ago

82% of EU farm subsidies bolster high emissions foods: Study

Leaves of three, let it be? Wide variability among poison ivy plants makes identification more challenging

Golfers' risk from pesticides used on turf grass is likely low, studies find

'Frankenstein design' enables 3D printed neutron collimator

9 hours ago

New antibiotic class effective against multidrug-resistant bacteria discovered

Computational tools fuel reconstruction of new and improved bird family tree

New method reveals hidden activity of life below ground

A frozen chunk of genome rewrites our understanding of bird evolution

Engineers 'symphonize' cleaner ammonia production

10 hours ago

Relevant PhysicsForums posts

What do large moles on the body indicate.

Mar 30, 2024

Avian flu - A new study led by a team from the University of Maryland

Mar 27, 2024

Are all biological catabolic reactions exergonic?

Mar 20, 2024

A First of Its Kind: A Calcium-based signal in the Human Brain

Mar 18, 2024

Biological culture and cultural biology

Mar 17, 2024

Potentially fatal dog parasite found in the Colorado River

Mar 15, 2024

More from Biology and Medical

Related Stories

First reports of severe coral bleaching this summer as the Great Barrier Reef warms up

Feb 23, 2024

Australia's Great Barrier Reef in grip of 'mass bleaching event'

Mar 8, 2024

Keppel corals show resilience following severe bleaching

Mar 2, 2023

The Great Barrier Reef's latest bout of bleaching is the fifth in eight summers—the corals now have almost no reprieve

Mar 11, 2024

Pause in recent coral recovery on much of Great Barrier Reef

Aug 8, 2023

New insights into coral symbiosis after bleaching

Feb 24, 2023

Recommended for you

Canada lynx historic range in US likely wider than previously thought

Machine learning provides a new picture of the great gray owl

14 hours ago

Researchers explore the hagfish genome, reconstruct the early genomic history of vertebrates

15 hours ago

Let us know if there is a problem with our content

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter