Gerard M H Swaen1, Miranda Langendam2, Joost Weyler3, Huibert Burger4, Sabine Siesling5, Willem Jan Atsma6, Lex Bouter7. 1. Department of Complex Genetics, Caphri Research Institute, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: g.swaen@maastrichtuniversity.nl. 2. Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium. 4. Department of General Practice, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Twente University, Hengelo, The Netherlands. 6. Astellas Europe, Leiden, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To develop a guideline on Responsible Epidemiologic Research Practice that will increase value and transparency, increase the accountability of the epidemiologists, and reduce research waste. SETTING: A working group of the Netherland Epidemiological Society was given the task of developing a guideline that would meet these objectives. Several publications about the need to prevent Detrimental Research Practices triggered this work. Among these were a series in the Lancet on research waste and a subsequent series on transparency in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. The reputation and trust in epidemiologic research is still high, and the Netherlands Epidemiological Society wishes to keep it that way. The guideline deals with how epidemiologic research should be conducted, archived, and disclosed. It does not deal with the more technical aspects, such as required sample size, choice of study design, and so forth. The guideline describes each step in the process of conducting an epidemiologic study, from the first idea to the ultimate publication and beyond. METHODS: The working group reviewed the literature on responsible research conduct, including the various existing codes of conduct. It applied the general principles from these codes to the elements of an epidemiologic study and formulated specific recommendations for each of these. Next step was to draft the guideline. Preceding the 2016 annual national epidemiology conference in Wageningen, a preconference was organized to discuss the draft guideline and to assess support. Support was clearly present, and the provided recommendations were incorporated into the draft guideline. In March 2017, a draft version of the guideline was sent to all 1,100 members of the society with the request to review and provide comments. All received responses were positive, and some minor additions were made. The Responsible Epidemiologic Research Practice guideline has now been approved by the board of the Netherlands Epidemiological Society. CONCLUSION: With the Responsible Epidemiologic Research Practice guideline, we hope to contribute to better research practices in epidemiology but perhaps also in adjacent disciplines.
OBJECTIVES: To develop a guideline on Responsible Epidemiologic Research Practice that will increase value and transparency, increase the accountability of the epidemiologists, and reduce research waste. SETTING: A working group of the Netherland Epidemiological Society was given the task of developing a guideline that would meet these objectives. Several publications about the need to prevent Detrimental Research Practices triggered this work. Among these were a series in the Lancet on research waste and a subsequent series on transparency in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. The reputation and trust in epidemiologic research is still high, and the Netherlands Epidemiological Society wishes to keep it that way. The guideline deals with how epidemiologic research should be conducted, archived, and disclosed. It does not deal with the more technical aspects, such as required sample size, choice of study design, and so forth. The guideline describes each step in the process of conducting an epidemiologic study, from the first idea to the ultimate publication and beyond. METHODS: The working group reviewed the literature on responsible research conduct, including the various existing codes of conduct. It applied the general principles from these codes to the elements of an epidemiologic study and formulated specific recommendations for each of these. Next step was to draft the guideline. Preceding the 2016 annual national epidemiology conference in Wageningen, a preconference was organized to discuss the draft guideline and to assess support. Support was clearly present, and the provided recommendations were incorporated into the draft guideline. In March 2017, a draft version of the guideline was sent to all 1,100 members of the society with the request to review and provide comments. All received responses were positive, and some minor additions were made. The Responsible Epidemiologic Research Practice guideline has now been approved by the board of the Netherlands Epidemiological Society. CONCLUSION: With the Responsible Epidemiologic Research Practice guideline, we hope to contribute to better research practices in epidemiology but perhaps also in adjacent disciplines.
Keywords:
Accountability and transparency; Detrimental research practices; Outcome reporting bias; Questionable research practices; Research integrity; Research practice
Authors: Wolfgang Hoffmann; Ute Latza; Sebastian E Baumeister; Martin Brünger; Nina Buttmann-Schweiger; Juliane Hardt; Verena Hoffmann; André Karch; Adrian Richter; Carsten Oliver Schmidt; Irene Schmidtmann; Enno Swart; Neeltje van den Berg Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2019-03-04 Impact factor: 8.082
Authors: Sandra Alba; Kristien Verdonck; Annick Lenglet; Susan F Rumisha; Martijn Wienia; Imre Teunissen; Masja Straetemans; Walter Mendoza; Daniel Jeannetot; Daniel Weibel; Harriet Mayanja-Kizza; Sanjay Juvekar Journal: BMJ Glob Health Date: 2020-10