Shaun Keegan
@shaunkeegan.bsky.social
Infectious disease epidemiologist @lshtm.bsky.social
Mathematical modeller, stats for epidemiology, AMR & vaccine development.
Also occasional rants about football and whoever Liverpool FC are playing.
🖖
Add ♾️ + 🌈
🏳️🌈 (he/him)
https://keegan.science/
Mathematical modeller, stats for epidemiology, AMR & vaccine development.
Also occasional rants about football and whoever Liverpool FC are playing.
🖖
Add ♾️ + 🌈
🏳️🌈 (he/him)
https://keegan.science/
Reposted by Shaun Keegan
Springer-Nature statement
“Whilst the details of peer review are confidential, we can confirm that the article underwent two rounds of review from two independent peer reviewers, supporting an accept decision.”
How am I now expected to believe that two people looked at the paper twice and DGAF?
“Whilst the details of peer review are confidential, we can confirm that the article underwent two rounds of review from two independent peer reviewers, supporting an accept decision.”
How am I now expected to believe that two people looked at the paper twice and DGAF?
Riding the Autism Bicycle to Retraction Town
Does anyone *really* know their Factor Fexcectorn?
nobreakthroughs.substack.com
November 28, 2025 at 1:36 PM
Springer-Nature statement
“Whilst the details of peer review are confidential, we can confirm that the article underwent two rounds of review from two independent peer reviewers, supporting an accept decision.”
How am I now expected to believe that two people looked at the paper twice and DGAF?
“Whilst the details of peer review are confidential, we can confirm that the article underwent two rounds of review from two independent peer reviewers, supporting an accept decision.”
How am I now expected to believe that two people looked at the paper twice and DGAF?
Reposted by Shaun Keegan
It apparently took humans almost 7 months to review this and they seem to have concluded that's a solid piece of research.
"Received 18 March 2025
Accepted 14 October 2025"
It took Gemini 43 seconds to make it very clear that's not the case.
"Received 18 March 2025
Accepted 14 October 2025"
It took Gemini 43 seconds to make it very clear that's not the case.
November 27, 2025 at 10:11 PM
It apparently took humans almost 7 months to review this and they seem to have concluded that's a solid piece of research.
"Received 18 March 2025
Accepted 14 October 2025"
It took Gemini 43 seconds to make it very clear that's not the case.
"Received 18 March 2025
Accepted 14 October 2025"
It took Gemini 43 seconds to make it very clear that's not the case.