The five different questions that W.P. Hanage’s article states are really important to interpreting scientific literature, with the use of these questions people can become better at sorting through scientific information. It reminds the readers to not believe or initially believe everything that an article publishes; a lot of them are filled with hopeful statements and might not be presenting all of the necessary information. Below are the five questions also with why each is important when reading scientific literature.
- Can Experiments detect differences that matter?
From the treatment created, is it able to correctly identify a specific microbe or does it just target a broad range of microorganisms? You want to make sure that if there was a specific illness being caused that there is a specific treatment to cure it.
- Does the study show causation or correlation?
This question props people to think of whether this microbe is specifically causing an illness or whether there are other factors that are contributing to it (like diet) that are causing the illness. It wouldn’t make sense for a treatment to be created for a specific microbe is something else is actually causing the illness.
- What is the mechanism?
It is important that the mechanism used to the specific microbial species being studied. They are highly specific and does the treatment even evolve the right aspect to have an effect on the microbe. We want to be able to correctly pinpoint the best mechanism for treatment.
- How much do experiments reflect reality?
With this question, people can think about the logistics of an experiment. Would the propositions being presented make sense for the situation? It makes a person stop and consider whether or not this would actually solve a problem or whether it is another factor that is influencing the illness.
- Could anything else explain the results?
This question is very important in promoting further research to be done on any scientific topic. It also allows people to truly think about the proposition that the article is promoting to its audience. Does it make sense? It makes people think about the other influences that can be contributing to the specific topic.
In my opinion, the most important question to ask is the last one. Although they are all are helpful in creating a better ability to critique scientific literature, the last questions proposes more thorough thinking. Basically when asking if something else could be potentially creating these results, we are allowing others to further the research on this topic. If we assumed that the results were 100% correct, people would not feel inclined to come up with new experiments or design ideas that could be contributing to that topic. It would be assumed that that would be a waste of time.
