Abstract
In recent years, there has been a growing focus on the unreliability of published biomedical and clinical research. To introduce effective new scientific contributors to the culture of health care, we propose a "datathon" or "hackathon" model in which participants with disparate, but potentially synergistic and complementary, knowledge and skills effectively combine to address questions faced by clinicians. The continuous peer review intrinsically provided by follow-up datathons, which take up prior uncompleted projects, might produce more reliable research, either by providing a different perspective on the study design and methodology or by replication of prior analyses.