Literature DB >> 17339612

Reproducible research: moving toward research the public can really trust.

Christine Laine1, Steven N Goodman, Michael E Griswold, Harold C Sox.   

Abstract

A community of scientists arrives at the truth by independently verifying new observations. In this time-honored process, journals serve 2 principal functions: evaluative and editorial. In their evaluative function, they winnow out research that is unlikely to stand up to independent verification; this task is accomplished by peer review. In their editorial function, they try to ensure transparent (by which we mean clear, complete, and unambiguous) and objective descriptions of the research. Both the evaluative and editorial functions go largely unnoticed by the public--the former only draws public attention when a journal publishes fraudulent research. However, both play a critical role in the progress of science. This paper is about both functions. We describe the evaluative processes we use and announce a new policy to help the scientific community evaluate, and build upon, the research findings that we publish.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17339612     DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-146-6-200703200-00154

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  49 in total

1.  Reproducible research in computational science.

Authors:  Roger D Peng
Journal:  Science       Date:  2011-12-02       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Principles for the ethical analysis of clinical and translational research.

Authors:  Jonathan A L Gelfond; Elizabeth Heitman; Brad H Pollock; Craig M Klugman
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-07-12       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Has the hunt for conflicts of interest gone too far? Yes.

Authors:  Thomas P Stossel
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-03-01

4.  Dishonesty in medicine revisited.

Authors:  Herbert L Fred
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  2008

5.  SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials.

Authors:  An-Wen Chan; Jennifer M Tetzlaff; Peter C Gøtzsche; Douglas G Altman; Howard Mann; Jesse A Berlin; Kay Dickersin; Asbjørn Hróbjartsson; Kenneth F Schulz; Wendy R Parulekar; Karmela Krleza-Jeric; Andreas Laupacis; David Moher
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2013-01-08

6.  How to Tell the Truth with Statistics: The Case for Accountable Data Analyses in Team-based Science.

Authors:  Jonathan A L Gelfond; Craig M Klugman; Leah J Welty; Elizabeth Heitman; Christopher Louden; Brad H Pollock
Journal:  J Transl Med Epidemiol       Date:  2014

7.  A guide to missing data for the pediatric nephrologist.

Authors:  Nicholas G Larkins; Jonathan C Craig; Armando Teixeira-Pinto
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 3.714

8.  A Call for Open-Source Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Authors:  Joshua T Cohen; Peter J Neumann; John B Wong
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2017-08-29       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Preparing raw clinical data for publication: guidance for journal editors, authors, and peer reviewers.

Authors:  Iain Hrynaszkiewicz; Melissa L Norton; Andrew J Vickers; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2010-01-29       Impact factor: 2.279

10.  Preparing raw clinical data for publication: guidance for journal editors, authors, and peer reviewers.

Authors:  Iain Hrynaszkiewicz; Melissa L Norton; Andrew J Vickers; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-01-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.