The language and conceptual framework of “research reproducibility” are nonstandard and unsettled across the sciences. In this Perspective, we review an array of explicit and implicit definitions of reproducibility and related terminology, and discuss how to avoid potential misunderstandings when these terms are used as a surrogate for “truth.”
Discover proposed solutions from leading experts in meta-research from featured presentations.
As the scientific enterprise has grown in size and diversity, we need empirical evidence on the research process to test and apply interventions that make it more efficient and its results more reliable. Meta-research is an evolving scientific discipline that aims to evaluate and improve research practices. It includes thematic areas of methods, reporting, reproducibility, evaluation, and incentives (how to do, report, verify, correct, and reward science). Much work is already done in this growing field, but efforts to-date are fragmented. We provide a map of ongoing efforts and discuss plans for connecting the multiple meta-research efforts across science worldwide.
Public registration and reporting of clinical trials is essential to minimize publication bias and increase the efficiency of medical research. ClinicalTrials.gov, one of the largest and most successful trial registration initiatives to date, provides an online searchable database of clinical studies of human participants conducted around the world.
News: ScopeMore Details
In a new paper with a provocative title, “Why most clinical research is not useful,” John Ioannidis, MD, DSc, makes the case that despite its name, much research that aims to improve outcomes in the clinic falls short, in part, because it isn’t designed to lead “to a favorable change in decision making… either by itself or when integrated with other studies and evidence.”
News: Biomed Central BlogMore Details
Last week we attended the 13th conference of the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) in the beautiful city of Strasbourg, France. The presentations and discussions revolved around the core theme ‘Scientific Integrity – Editors on the front line’.
Latest BlogAll Blogs
Recently, I was asked to review a Randomized Controlled Trial concerning an antidepressant. Among my comments, I requested the authors provide individual data allowing for a re-analysis. Kindly, the authors answered me that my comment was weird and they’ve never received such a request.
Next EventAll Events
Workshops and Meetings: Ann Harbor, MichiganMore Details
This workshop is a crash course on the problems of publication bias, inability to replicate research, and specification searching (or p-hacking, among other names) that have heretofore caused researchers problems.