When making decisions about funding and jobs the scientific community should recognise that most of the tools used to evaluate scientific excellence are biased in favour of established disciplines and against interdisciplinary research.

As the scientific community adapts to new working conditions in response to the growing pandemic, early-career researchers recommend actions to help lessen the unintended consequences of canceled conferences.

The fact that it is difficult to evaluate and compare the outputs of individual researchers might actually be good for science.

Peer review scores were poorly predictive of research project success in this large dataset, suggesting that reviewers cannot reliably predict which meritorious applications are most likely to be productive.

By sharing their experiences, early-career scientists can help to make the case for increased government funding for researchers.

The identification of four acidic amino acids as potential calcium-binding residues in the TMEM16A calcium-activated chloride channel furthers the molecular understanding of this ion channel family.

Analysis of data on drug-gene interactions suggests that decentralized collaboration will increase the robustness of scientific findings in biomedical research.

The partial success of an attempt to repeat findings in cancer biology highlights the need to improve study designs for preclinical research into metastasis and the targeting of cancer cells.

What can institutions and funding agencies do to address an array of issues facing the biomedical research community in the United States?