[KvanteKat]

For anyone who likes academic drama (or who is interested in the underlying methodological disagreements among academic statisticians), it is worth pointing out that Jager and Leek's 2014 paper was a discussion paper, and that Ionnidas was one of the people invited to write a response to be published alongside with the original paper. He did (https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxt036) and the response is extremely critical of Jaeger and Leeks' methodology and his contempt for the authors is not hard to read between the lines.

[KvanteKat]

For anyone who wants to get really into the weeds, here are all the articles in the sequence of discussion papers:

Main Paper (Jager and Leek): ttps://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxt007

Response papers:

  - Yoav Benjamini and Yotam Hechtlinger: https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxt032

  - David R. Cox: https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxt033

  - Andrew Gelman and Keith O'Rourke: https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxt034

  - Steven N. Goodman: https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxt035

  - John P. A. Ioannidis (the spicy response): https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxt036

  - Martijn J. Schuemie, Patrick B. Ryan, Marc A. Suchard, Zach Shahn, and David Madigan: https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxt037

Jaeger and Leeks' rejoinder to the responses: https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxt038

edit: fixed some formatting and link to main paper