They shift to such strict criteria for acceptance in their statistical analysis that the investigation is difficult to follow. Often the articles are an investigation of a problem that is of little or no clinical significance. So, I would like to chastise the journals as well as the lay press for being on the opposite ends of the spectrum. By doing so, the pathogenesis of many diseases becomes unraveled. To be sure, scientific minutia is an important part of the learning process as well, but the journal must be willing to bridge the gap between laboratory statistics and the end user animal.
Frustration exists on many sides of the problem.
But to throw out the process is not fruitful either.