Clarity and accuracy of reporting are fundamental to the scientific process. Readability formulas can estimate how difficult a text is to read. Here, in a corpus consisting of 709,577 abstracts published between 1881 and 2015 from 123 scientific journals, we show that the readability of science is steadily decreasing. Our analyses show that this trend is indicative of a growing use of general scientific jargon. These results are concerning for scientists and for the wider public, as they impact both the reproducibility and accessibility of research findings.

Neuroimaging, in addition to many other fields of clinical research, is both time-consuming and expensive, and recruitable patients can be scarce. These constraints limit the possibility of large-sample experimental designs, and often lead to statistically underpowered studies. This problem is exacerbated by the use of outcome measures whose accuracy is sometimes insufficient to answer the scientific questions posed. Reliability is usually assessed in validation studies using healthy participants, however these results are often not easily applicable to clinical studies examining different populations. I present a new method and tools for using summary statistics from previously published test-retest studies to approximate the reliability of outcomes in new samples. In this way, the feasibility of a new study can be assessed during planning stages, and before collecting any new data. An R package called relfeas also accompanies this article for performing these calculations. In summary, these methods and tools will allow researchers to avoid performing costly studies which are, by virtue of their design, unlikely to yield informative conclusions.

BACKGROUND: Accumulating evidence suggests that the immune system may be an important target for new treatment approaches in schizophrenia. Positron emission tomography and radioligands binding to the translocator protein (TSPO), which is expressed in glial cells in the brain including immune cells, represents a potential method for patient stratification and treatment monitoring. This study examined whether patients with first-episode psychosis and schizophrenia had altered TSPO levels compared with healthy control subjects. METHODS: PubMed was searched for studies comparing patients with psychosis with healthy control subjects using second-generation TSPO radioligands. The outcome measure was total distribution volume (V T ), an index of TSPO levels, in frontal cortex, temporal cortex, and hippocampus. Bayes factors (BFs) were applied to examine the relative support for higher, lower, or no difference in patients' TSPO levels compared with healthy control subjects. RESULTS: Five studies, with 75 participants with first-episode psychosis or schizophrenia and 77 healthy control subjects, were included. BFs showed strong support for lower V T in patients relative to no difference (all BFs .