Question Solved Locked

How do I access full-text articles when my institution does not have a journal subscription?

Back to Forum
Growing 180 pts 0 followers
Bearys Institute of Technology · Posted
Entrepreneurship & Innovation Economics

Problem statement

I am working on a bioinformatics project analyzing GWAS data for a rare Indian genetic disorder. My sample size is only n=89 cases and n=143 controls due to the rarity of the condition.

Specific questions:

  1. Should I report power analysis even though I know the study is underpowered?
  2. Bonferroni seems too conservative with this sample size; is FDR acceptable?
  3. I don't have an independent cohort to validate. Is this a dealbreaker for journal submission?

This is a legitimate clinical study with IRB approval. I just want to know how to frame the limitations honestly.

Sign in to interact

Sign in to join the discussion.

16 Replies

Oldest Top
0
Nandita Ghosh Distinguished 720 pts · Accepted answer

Strongly agree with the point about choosing venues carefully. One paper in NeurIPS > five papers in obscure workshops.

0
Replying to Nandita Ghosh
Jaya Lakshmanan Growing 50 pts · Accepted answer

Could you clarify what you mean by results-blind review? I have heard of it but never understood how it works in practice. Wouldn't reviewers need to see results to evaluate whether the methodology is sound?

0
Pooja Nambiar Growing 115 pts · Accepted answer

I'd push back slightly on the idea that industry collaboration is universally beneficial for academic research. The incentive misalignment is real.

Industry partners want deliverables on a schedule. Academic research is often exploratory and unpredictable. When the two clash, it is usually the researcher who has to compromise.either by rushing results, constraining publication, or steering away from results that are inconvenient for the sponsor.

This doesn't mean industry collaboration is bad. But the terms matter enormously. IP rights, publication rights, and the ability to pursue negative results should be negotiated upfront and protected in writing.

0
Eshan Patil Growing 70 pts · Accepted answer

I have a slightly different take from my experience in industry research. The reproducibility crisis is real but unevenly distributed. Fields with strong engineering culture (computational biology, ML with benchmarks) have actually improved significantly in the last 5 years. The bigger problem is in fields where data sharing is structurally difficult.clinical medicine, behavioral economics.

The ML community's move toward open code and reproducibility checklists has been genuinely effective.

0
Replying to Eshan Patil
Ishaan Verma Growing 60 pts · Accepted answer

This question comes up a lot. The answer really depends on your specific field and what your committee values.

0
Replying to Eshan Patil
Sanjay Kumar Growing 145 pts · Accepted answer

If you are not already using a reading group format with your students, I would strongly recommend it. Forces everyone to articulate what they read.

0
Pooja Nambiar Growing 115 pts · Accepted answer

I am in a very similar situation. Would you be willing to share the outline of your PMRF proposal? Not the content.just the section headings and approximate word allocation.

0
Prakash Iyer Distinguished 640 pts · Accepted answer

For longitudinal data with missing values, mixed-effects models handle this more gracefully than imputation in most cases.

0
Ganesh Menon Growing 140 pts · Accepted answer

As a senior faculty member (25 years in the system), I want to offer a different perspective. Yes, the pressures are real. But I have also seen the other side: students who produce excellent work, publish honestly, and build reputations over time. The system is imperfect but not entirely broken.

What has actually helped my students: choosing venues carefully (a few strong papers rather than many weak ones), developing genuine collaborations rather than transactional coauthorships.

0
Replying to Ganesh Menon
Dinesh Kulkarni Distinguished 730 pts · Accepted answer

Seconding the recommendation for Zotero. Game changer for managing references across multiple projects.

0
Replying to Ganesh Menon
Sunil Bhattacharya Active 390 pts · Accepted answer

Highly recommend checking out the PMRF portal for the actual numbers.they update the stipend structure annually.

0
Replying to Ganesh Menon
Gopal Naidu · Accepted answer

Thank you! The reference to MuRIL is particularly useful.I had not considered it as an alternative to XLM-R for Indic languages.

0
test tester Growing 165 pts · Accepted answer

I think you are conflating two separate problems here. The publish-or-perish culture creates pressure, yes.but the solution is not to criticize researchers who are navigating an unfair system. The real problem is with evaluation committees who treat publication count as a proxy for research quality. Fix the evaluation, and the incentives change.

Also worth noting: open review has been implemented in some fields and has its own problems. It can disadvantage early-career researchers who fear retaliation from senior colleagues they have reviewed critically.

0
Preethi Anand Distinguished 690 pts · Accepted answer

Just to make sure I understand the Zotero workflow correctly.is the .bib file synced to Overleaf automatically every time you add a new paper, or do you need to trigger an export manually?

0
Replying to Preethi Anand
Suresh Iyer · Accepted answer

Seconding the recommendation for Zotero. Game changer for managing references across multiple projects.

0
Replying to Preethi Anand
Amit Joshi Starting 15 pts · Accepted answer

For longitudinal data with missing values, mixed-effects models handle this more gracefully than imputation in most cases.