Surgisphere
-
wrote on 3 Jun 2020, 10:02 last edited by
Two things jumped out at me:
- How could Lancet’s pre-publication review process lapsed so spectacularly?
- Surgisphere says they use AI to deal with the vast amount, and vast number of sources, of data, albeit with only 11 employees. That, to me, says not enough humans are actually verifying that the AI is doing the right things with the data.
-
Two things jumped out at me:
- How could Lancet’s pre-publication review process lapsed so spectacularly?
- Surgisphere says they use AI to deal with the vast amount, and vast number of sources, of data, albeit with only 11 employees. That, to me, says not enough humans are actually verifying that the AI is doing the right things with the data.
wrote on 3 Jun 2020, 10:34 last edited by@Axtremus said in Surgisphere:
they use AI to deal with the vast amount, and vast number of sources, of data
That sounds quite fishy. Never trust anyone who claims they use "AI". It's almost as specific as saying "we use electricity".
The article mentions machine learning. However, this doesn't strike me as the kind of scenario where ML could be beneficial. You want clean, predictable statistical methods for such research, not messy unpredictable and unexplainable ML algorithms.
-
wrote on 3 Jun 2020, 15:27 last edited by
Quite a wave around this Surgiphere story today.
What I wonder: If Surgiphere provided fake data, what was their motivation for doing so? Cui bono?
-
wrote on 3 Jun 2020, 16:15 last edited by jon-nyc 6 Mar 2020, 16:15
This is fucking crazy. #FakeMed? No thanks, let’s just not go there.
-
wrote on 3 Jun 2020, 23:05 last edited by
Um, the drug has been around for how long and given to how many people? And now suddenly it’s deadly.
Okay then.
-
Um, the drug has been around for how long and given to how many people? And now suddenly it’s deadly.
Okay then.
wrote on 3 Jun 2020, 23:10 last edited by@Loki said in Surgisphere:
Um, the drug has been around for how long and given to how many people? And now suddenly it’s deadly.
Okay then.
HCQ is probably a very safe drug when given for malaria. If, as we're beginning to think, SARS-CoV-2 causes a vascular inflammation/instability, I can see how it can affect the heart in a way not seen in the past.
-
@Loki said in Surgisphere:
Um, the drug has been around for how long and given to how many people? And now suddenly it’s deadly.
Okay then.
HCQ is probably a very safe drug when given for malaria. If, as we're beginning to think, SARS-CoV-2 causes a vascular inflammation/instability, I can see how it can affect the heart in a way not seen in the past.
wrote on 3 Jun 2020, 23:13 last edited by Loki 6 Mar 2020, 23:14@George-K said in Surgisphere:
@Loki said in Surgisphere:
Um, the drug has been around for how long and given to how many people? And now suddenly it’s deadly.
Okay then.
HCQ is probably a very safe drug when given for malaria. If, as we're beginning to think, SARS-CoV-2 causes a vascular inflammation/instability, I can see how it can affect the heart in a way not seen in the past.
I know well two people who have been on it for decades as an immunosuppressant (lupus and rheumatoid issues)....and in fact are having some hassle getting it now. You could be right but they admitted no warnings for adverse effects.
-
@George-K said in Surgisphere:
@Loki said in Surgisphere:
Um, the drug has been around for how long and given to how many people? And now suddenly it’s deadly.
Okay then.
HCQ is probably a very safe drug when given for malaria. If, as we're beginning to think, SARS-CoV-2 causes a vascular inflammation/instability, I can see how it can affect the heart in a way not seen in the past.
I know well two people who have been on it for decades as an immunosuppressant (lupus and rheumatoid issues)....and in fact are having some hassle getting it now. You could be right but they admitted no warnings for adverse effects.
wrote on 3 Jun 2020, 23:16 last edited by George K 6 Mar 2020, 23:17@Loki I agree. However, we're in uncharted waters when it comes to how this disease works. If there's an effect on the heart (as several reports have shown), I'd not be surprised that HCQ can highlight this well-known side effect in susceptible patients.
My point is simply that HCQ in people with RA, SLE and other conditions might be very different from HCQ in COVID-19.
-
@Loki I agree. However, we're in uncharted waters when it comes to how this disease works. If there's an effect on the heart (as several reports have shown), I'd not be surprised that HCQ can highlight this well-known side effect in susceptible patients.
My point is simply that HCQ in people with RA, SLE and other conditions might be very different from HCQ in COVID-19.
wrote on 3 Jun 2020, 23:26 last edited by@George-K said in Surgisphere:
@Loki I agree. However, we're in uncharted waters when it comes to how this disease works. If there's an effect on the heart (as several reports have shown), I'd not be surprised that HCQ can highlight this well-known side effect in susceptible patients.
My point is simply that HCQ in people with RA, SLE and other conditions might be very different from HCQ in COVID-19.
I get it.
-
wrote on 4 Jun 2020, 20:22 last edited by
Three of four authors retract the paper.
-
Three of four authors retract the paper.
wrote on 4 Jun 2020, 21:07 last edited by@Klaus said in Surgisphere:
Three of four authors retract the paper.
Good for them. I don't know enough about the details of the question, but the fact that they withdraw the paper because there are questions about the data is a good thing.
-
wrote on 5 Jun 2020, 21:51 last edited by George K 6 May 2020, 21:51
I've looked at The Lancet with a skeptical eye ever since the vaccine/autism debacle.
-
wrote on 5 Jun 2020, 22:35 last edited by
ROTFLMAO we’re done. Holy crap. If it’s gotten this bad...
-
wrote on 5 Jun 2020, 22:37 last edited by
In my field of research, you have to submit the full dataset together with the paper, and both the data and the software it is processed with will be reviewed before publication. I’m surprised this isn’t common in the best medical journals. In their defense, reviewing quickly is essential for COVID results, so maybe they relaxed their standards to save time.
-
In my field of research, you have to submit the full dataset together with the paper, and both the data and the software it is processed with will be reviewed before publication. I’m surprised this isn’t common in the best medical journals. In their defense, reviewing quickly is essential for COVID results, so maybe they relaxed their standards to save time.
wrote on 6 Jun 2020, 05:13 last edited by@Klaus said in Surgisphere:
In my field of research, you have to submit the full dataset together with the paper, and both the data and the software it is processed with will be reviewed before publication. I’m surprised this isn’t common in the best medical journals. In their defense, reviewing quickly is essential for COVID results, so maybe they relaxed their standards to save time.
Most good journals I’ve submitted to require a signed statement that the raw data is available upon request, and offer the possibility of uploading the files. But I doubt most reviewers would bother to wade through it, and yes it would be very time consuming, and speed of processing is a selling point for journals. (Although admittedly I have not published in New England or the lancet, mostly in surgical journals which are less prestigious) No one wants to wait three years for publication when the data is either irrelevant already or someone else has preempted the idea in another journal.
And yes Covid paper are being fast tracked.
-
wrote on 10 Jun 2020, 00:37 last edited by
The University of Utah has “mutually agreed” to terminate the faculty appointment of Amit Patel, who was among the authors of two retracted papers on Covid-19 and who appears to have played a key role in involving a little-known company that has ignited a firestorm of controversy.
“The terminated position was an unpaid adjunct appointment with the Department of Biomedical Engineering,” a university spokesperson told STAT. Patel had listed the affiliation on both papers, published in the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine. The spokesperson declined to comment on whether the decision was related to the retractions.
“The University of Utah does not comment on reasons surrounding termination of academic appointments,” the spokesperson said.
Late Sunday, after publication of this story, Patel tweeted he had “verbally terminated” his affiliation with the University of Utah a week ago, and that the relationship had ended formally this past Friday. “There is a much bigger story for which I still do not have the information,” he wrote.
The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine both announced the retraction of papers on which Patel was a co-author within hours on Thursday. The paper in the Lancet, in particular, received widespread attention because it raised safety concerns about the drug hydroxychloroquine based on what was purported to be a huge amount of data collected from health records from hundreds of hospitals all around the world.
Among other consequences of the paper, the World Health Organization paused enrollment of part of a clinical trial meant to test the drug.
The lead author was Mandeep Mehra, the medical director of the Brigham and Women’s Hospital Heart and Vascular Center and editor-in-chief of The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation. Along with his co-authors, he had received the data from a small company known as Surgisphere, run by CEO Sapan Desai...
Mehra said through the spokesperson that Surgisphere claimed to possess certification for data acquisition, data warehousing, data analytics, and data reporting from the International Standards Organization.
“I did not do enough to ensure that the data source was appropriate for this use,” Mehra said in a statement. “For that, and for all the disruptions — both directly and indirectly — I am truly sorry.”
Surgisphere has not issued a statement since the retractions were made. Desai did not immediately return an emailed request for comment.
-
wrote on 16 Jun 2020, 12:04 last edited by
Gone.
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/surgisphere#section-overview
A Guardian investigation can reveal the US-based company Surgisphere, whose handful of employees appear to include a science fiction writer and an adult-content model, has provided data for multiple studies on Covid-19 co-authored by its chief executive, but has so far failed to adequately explain its data or methodology.
Nothing shady at all:
The Guardian’s investigation has found:
A search of publicly available material suggests several of Surgisphere’s employees have little or no data or scientific background. An employee listed as a science editor appears to be a science fiction author and fantasy artist whose professional profile suggests writing is her fulltime job. Another employee listed as a marketing executive is an adult model and events hostess, who also acts in videos for organisations.
The company’s LinkedIn page has fewer than 100 followers and last week listed just six employees. This was changed to three employees as of Wednesday.
While Surgisphere claims to run one of the largest and fastest hospital databases in the world, it has almost no online presence. Its Twitter handle has fewer than 170 followers, with no posts between October 2017 and March 2020.
Until Monday, the “get in touch” link on Surgisphere’s homepage redirected to a WordPress template for a cryptocurrency website, raising questions about how hospitals could easily contact the company to join its database.
Desai has been named in three medical malpractice suits, unrelated to the Surgisphere database. In an interview with the Scientist, Desai previously described the allegations as “unfounded”.
In 2008, Desai launched a crowdfunding campaign on the website Indiegogo promoting a wearable “next generation human augmentation device that can help you achieve what you never thought was possible”. The device never came to fruition.
Desai’s Wikipedia page has been deleted following questions about Surgisphere and his history, first raised in 2010.Lots more at the Guardian's site.
-
wrote on 16 Jun 2020, 12:07 last edited by
Sketchy!!!
