From Nature Volume: 487, Pages: 427–428 Date published: (26 July 2012)
Finally, the .... community must take responsibility for establishing standards for the generation, quality control and statistical analysis of high-throughput data generated using new .... technologies (a model that has generally worked well, for instance, in ..... association studies) and for responding rapidly to published errors. Traditionally, scientists wrote politely outraged letters to journals. Many now voice their concerns in online media, a more rapid and open way to ensure that the public view of a finding is tempered with appropriate caution. Such informal avenues for rapid post-publication discourse should be encouraged.
Nothing can completely prevent the publication of incorrect results. It is the nature of cutting-edge science that even careful researchers are occasionally fooled. We should neither deceive ourselves that perfect science is possible, nor focus so heavily on reducing error that we are afraid to innovate. However, if we work together to define, apply and enforce clear standards for genomic analysis, we can ensure that most of the unanticipated results are surprising because they reveal unexpected biology, rather than because they are wrong."