We are happy to present this new initiative ‘Be Positive about the Negative in Pharmacology’ series of article collections hosted across the journal. This collection aims to assess ‘negative results’ in science, often known as orphan data, that result in nullifying the hypothesis of scientific questions.
Results which show no specific effects or negative results, or the idea of ‘finding nothing’, can be essential to advancing knowledge in the field of Ethnopharmacology. More often than expected and reflected in scientific publications, scientists are faced with failed experiments or negative results ultimately preventing a hypothesis from being proven or disproven. In the absence of knowing these negative results exist, researchers end up utilizing valuable resources and time on experiments that have already been performed. In the field of pharmacology, this can lead to millions of dollars lost. There is a negative connotation associated with disproving hypotheses and most manuscripts published rely on advancements and discoveries within the field. However, we believe that acknowledging deviations from the expectation or proving when something is not the case should also be disseminated to a wider audience to help provide alternative strategies to answer such research questions. Therefore, this Research Topic aims to acknowledge such inconclusive or negative results produced within the field of Ethnopharmacology.
This research topic also offers an opportunity to highlight the need for an unbiased approach in the research of local and traditional medicines. All too often a stated claim of a paper is the ‘validation/verification of a traditional or herbal medicine’ or its use. If one wants to validate the use of a certain preparation using a set of in vitro or in vivo experiments (or a clinical study) one does not allow for inconclusive or negative results. Most fundamentally, such studies are based on t testable research questions, but one which will result in a biased scientific approach. A fundamental characteristic of any scientific method is to base one’s work on a research question or a hypothesis. I can validate an assay or a procedure, but not an experimental outcome-oriented research as such. Therefore, this research topic offers the opportunity to embrace an open-minded approach in terms of what the outcomes of a pharmacological or clinical study will be. It offers a space to assess the reasons for such outcomes and what can be learned from them.
This Research Topic wants to remove the perception that not showing specific effects or negative results are difficult to publish. Highlighting negative results can improve science and help collaborative research enabling other scientists to learn from them. We welcome manuscripts including original research and reviews that address the negative results and nullifying hypotheses within the field of Ethnopharmacology. Topics include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Methodological challenges in determining pharmacological effects of local and traditional herbal medicines
2. The challenges of understanding complex traditional medical preparations using biomedical – pharmacological approaches
3. Studies which resulted in no positive effect in the models used
4. Developing improved strategies for ascertaining a hypothesis-driven research, which results in a systematic evaluation of such medicines
This article collection will inform and help provide direction and guidance to researchers in the field. Only manuscripts that focus solely on negative, null or inconclusive results will be considered for peer review.
Note to authors: We would also like to draw to the attention of authors who are hoping to submit to this collection, the development of PEER, an open access ‘Platform for the Exchange of Experimental Research Standards’ built to aid scientists in determining experimental factors and variables most likely to affect experimental outcomes.
All the manuscripts submitted to the collection will need to fully comply with the Four Pillars of Best Practice in Ethnopharmacology (you can freely download the full version
here).
Please note: Manuscripts submitted to the section must adhere to the author’s guidelines and article types specific to the section. Only manuscript of sound experimental planning and high quality research will be considered for review.