Literature DB >> 34386938

Study Registration for the Field of Prevention Science: Considering Options and Paths Forward.

Jessaca Spybrook1, Rebecca Maynard2, Dustin Anderson3.   

Abstract

The practice of prospectively registering the details of intervention studies in a public database or registry is gaining momentum across disciplines as a strategy for increasing the transparency, credibility, and accessibility of study findings. In this article, we consider five registries that may be relevant for registration of intervention studies in the field of prevention science: ClinicalTrials.gov, the American Economic Association Registry of Randomized Controlled Trials (AEA RCT Registry), the Open Science Framework Preregistration (OSF Preregistration), the Registry for International Development Impact Evaluations (RIDIE), and the Registry of Efficacy and Effectiveness Studies (REES). We examine the five registries in terms of substantive focus, study designs, and contents of registry entries. We consider two paths forward for prospective registration of intervention studies in the field of prevention science: Path A: register all studies in ClinicalTrials.gov and Path B: allow individual researchers to select the registry with the "best fit." Lastly, we consider how the field might begin to establish norms around registration.
© 2021. Society for Prevention Research.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Intervention studies; Open science; Registration; Registry; Transparency

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34386938     DOI: 10.1007/s11121-021-01290-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Sci        ISSN: 1389-4986


  6 in total

1.  HARKing: hypothesizing after the results are known.

Authors:  N L Kerr
Journal:  Pers Soc Psychol Rev       Date:  1998

2.  Issues relating to selective reporting when including non-randomized studies in systematic reviews on the effects of healthcare interventions.

Authors:  Susan L Norris; David Moher; Barnaby C Reeves; Beverley Shea; Yoon Loke; Sarah Garner; Laurie Anderson; Peter Tugwell; George Wells
Journal:  Res Synth Methods       Date:  2012-11-13       Impact factor: 5.273

3.  Curtailing the Use of Preregistration: A Misused Term.

Authors:  Danielle B Rice; David Moher
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2019-08-26

4.  Social science. Publication bias in the social sciences: unlocking the file drawer.

Authors:  Annie Franco; Neil Malhotra; Gabor Simonovits
Journal:  Science       Date:  2014-08-28       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Determinants of selective reporting: A taxonomy based on content analysis of a random selection of the literature.

Authors:  Jenny T van der Steen; Cornelis A van den Bogert; Mirjam C van Soest-Poortvliet; Soulmaz Fazeli Farsani; René H J Otten; Gerben Ter Riet; Lex M Bouter
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-05       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias - an updated review.

Authors:  Kerry Dwan; Carrol Gamble; Paula R Williamson; Jamie J Kirkham
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-07-05       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.