A Plea for Neutral Comparison Studies in Computational Sciences
This work highlights a systemic issue in scientific publishing that affects researchers and practitioners by promoting more rigorous and unbiased method evaluations, though it is incremental in its call to action.
The paper addresses the undervaluation of neutral comparison studies in computational sciences, advocating for their importance in objectively evaluating existing methods and establishing standards, similar to clinical research.
In a context where most published articles are devoted to the development of "new methods", comparison studies are generally appreciated by readers but surprisingly given poor consideration by many scientific journals. In connection with recent articles on over-optimism and epistemology published in Bioinformatics, this letter stresses the importance of neutral comparison studies for the objective evaluation of existing methods and the establishment of standards by drawing parallels with clinical research.