John Ioannidis published a 2005 article that alerted scientists to the replicability crisis.

True: John Ioannidis published an article in 2005 (for example 'Why Most Published Research Findings Are False', PLoS Medicine) that is widely credited as a major early warning about the replicability crisis. The claim does not require that the article was the first such warning. Mostly true: the article exists and is so credited, but a minor detail such as the year is slightly off. Mixed: the article exists, but scholars widely dispute that it played a significant role in alerting scientists to the crisis. Mostly false: Ioannidis wrote on related topics, but no 2005 article of his is credited this way. False: no such article exists.

Set before the research began.

1. E1 Why Most Published Research Findings Are False PMC (NCBI), reproducing PLoS Medicine article by John Ioannidis · 30 August 2005

   “Citation: Ioannidis JPA (2005) Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med 2(8): e124.”

2. E2 Why Most Published Research Findings Are False - Wikipedia Wikipedia · 23 January 2010

   “"Why Most Published Research Findings Are False" is a 2005 essay written by John Ioannidis, a professor at the Stanford School of Medicine, and published in PLOS Medicine.[1] It is considered foundational to the field of metascience.”

3. E3 Why Most Published Research Findings Are False - Wikipedia Wikipedia · 23 January 2010

   “While the general arguments in the paper recommending reforms in scientific research methodology were well-received, Ioannidis received criticism for the validity of his model and his claim that the majority of scientific findings are false.”

4. E4 Replication crisis - Wikipedia Wikipedia · 9 January 2015

   “When publication bias is considered along with the fact that a majority of tested hypotheses might be false a priori, it is plausible that a considerable proportion of research findings might be false positives, as shown by metascientist John Ioannidis.”

E1 confirms that Ioannidis published "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False" in PLoS Medicine in 2005. E2 says this essay is considered foundational to metascience, and E4's entry on the replication crisis credits Ioannidis with showing that many research findings may be false positives. E3 reports criticism of the paper's model and its headline claim, but says its reform arguments were well received. It does not show that scholars dispute the paper's role in drawing attention to the crisis.