Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26594330›Full record

ArticleF1000Research2015

The Resource Identification Initiative: A cultural shift in publishing.

Anita Bandrowski, Matthew Brush, Jeffery S Grethe, Melissa A Haendel, David N Kennedy, Sean Hill, Patrick R Hof, Maryann E Martone, Maaike Pols, Serena Tan and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in F1000Research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A Pan-Cancer Ex Vivo Drug Screen Atlas for Functional Precision Oncology.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Cell line authentication and validation is a key requirement forJournal of cell communication and signaling · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Establishing an early indicator for data sharing and reuse.Learned publishing : journal of the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Centralizing neurofibromatosis experimental tool knowledge with the NF Research Tools Database.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Anita BandrowskiCenter for Research in Biological Systems, UCSD, la Jolla, CA, 92093, USA.
Matthew BrushDepartment of Medical Informatics & Clinical Epidemiology, OHSU, Portland, Oregon, 97239, USA.
Jeffery S GretheCenter for Research in Biological Systems, UCSD, la Jolla, CA, 92093, USA.
Melissa A HaendelDepartment of Medical Informatics & Clinical Epidemiology, OHSU, Portland, Oregon, 97239, USA.
David N KennedyDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, 01605, USA.
Sean HillKarolinska Institutet, Stockholm, 171 77, Sweden.
Patrick R HofFishberg Department of Neuroscience and Friedman Brain Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Maryann E MartoneCenter for Research in Biological Systems, UCSD, la Jolla, CA, 92093, USA.
Maaike PolsScientific Outreach, Faculty of 1000 Ltd, London, W1T 4LB, UK.
Serena TanJohn Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 07030, USA.
Nicole WashingtonLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, 94720, USA.
Elena Zudilova-SeinstraElsevier, Amsterdam, 1043 NX, Netherlands.
Nicole VasilevskyDepartment of Medical Informatics & Clinical Epidemiology, OHSU, Portland, Oregon, 97239, USA.
Resource Identification Initiative Members are listed here: https://www.force11.org/node/4463/members

Funding

NIDDK Network Coordinating UnitU24DK097771 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI Shuibing Chen, Jeffrey S. Grethe · 2013 to 2026
$20.9M
The Monarch Initiative: Linking Diseases to Model Organism ResourcesR24OD011883 · OD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI HAENDEL, MELISSA A, MUNGALL, CHRISTOPHER J · 2012 to 2024
$16.0M
OPERATION, SUPPORT AND STRATEGIC ENHANCEMENT OF THE NEUROSCIENCE INFORMATION FRAMEWORKU24DA039832 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI GRETHE, JEFFREY S., MARTONE, MARYANN E · 2015 to 2016
$2.0M
NIDA NIH HHS HHSN271200577531CNIDA NIH HHS U24 DA039832NIDDK NIH HHS U24 DK097771NIH HHS R24 OD011883
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A central tenet in support of research reproducibility is the ability to uniquely identify research resources, i.e., reagents, tools, and materials that are used to perform experiments. However, current reporting practices for research resources are insufficient to allow humans and algorithms to identify the exact resources that are reported or answer basic questions such as "What other studies used resource X?" To address this issue, the Resource Identification Initiative was launched as a pilot project to improve the reporting standards for research resources in the methods sections of papers and thereby improve identifiability and reproducibility. The pilot engaged over 25 biomedical journal editors from most major publishers, as well as scientists and funding officials. Authors were asked to include Research Resource Identifiers (RRIDs) in their manuscripts prior to publication for three resource types: antibodies, model organisms, and tools (including software and databases). RRIDs represent accession numbers assigned by an authoritative database, e.g., the model organism databases, for each type of resource. To make it easier for authors to obtain RRIDs, resources were aggregated from the appropriate databases and their RRIDs made available in a central web portal ( www.scicrunch.org/resources). RRIDs meet three key criteria: they are machine readable, free to generate and access, and are consistent across publishers and journals. The pilot was launched in February of 2014 and over 300 papers have appeared that report RRIDs. The number of journals participating has expanded from the original 25 to more than 40. Here, we present an overview of the pilot project and its outcomes to date. We show that authors are generally accurate in performing the task of identifying resources and supportive of the goals of the project. We also show that identifiability of the resources pre- and post-pilot showed a dramatic improvement for all three resource types, suggesting that the project has had a significant impact on reproducibility relating to research resources.

Indexed as

Multi-centre initiativePost-pilot dataPre-pilot dataPublishingResource identifiers

Identifiers

PMID26594330
PMCPMC4648211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.