Peer review helps quite a bit, but I'd suggest that it doesn't resolve all of the problems. I've personally sat through junk in technical conferences in my field in what was supposed to have been a reviewed article. My best guess was that they couldn't find anyone competent to review those articles because they were all busy doing real work and the one I saw were reviewed by what was left. The bottom line I'd propose is that the paper needs to make sense to you for you to be willing to trust it. You might not follow all the details but it feels like BS, then it probably is.
__________________
Laura - L5S1 Charitee
C5/6 and 6/7 Prodisc C
Facet problems L4-S1
General joint hypermobility
Jim - C4/5, C5/6, L4/5 disk bulges and facet damage, L4/5 disk tears, currently using regenerative medicine to address
"There are many Annapurnas in the lives of men" Maurice Herzog
|