ArticlePLoS biology2018
Digital open science-Teaching digital tools for reproducible and transparent research.
Article in PLoS biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed.
- Open Science in Undergraduate Medical Education: An International Framework for Transparency, Responsibility, and Professional Identity Formation.Perspectives on medical education · 2026Article
- Using Open Science Tools to Teach Environmental Sciences.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Reducing risk of bias in interventional studies during their design and conduct: a scoping review.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- The most prevalent perceived barriers to sharing research data at the point of manuscript acceptance in health and life sciences: a survey at the University of Bristol.F1000Research · 2025Article
- ENCORE: a practical implementation to improve reproducibility and transparency of computational research.Nature communications · 2024Article
- A how-to guide for code sharing in biology.PLoS biology · 2024Review
- Integrating open education practices with data analysis of open science in an undergraduate course.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Best practices for genetic and genomic data archiving.Nature ecology & evolution · 2024Review
- Design and validation of a conceptual model regarding impact of open science on healthcare research processes.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Iranian researchers' perspective about concept and effect of open science on research publication.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Teaching open and reproducible scholarship: a critical review of the evidence base for current pedagogical methods and their outcomes.Royal Society open science · 2023Review
- ASAS-NANP symposium: mathematical modeling in animal nutrition-Making sense of big data and machine learning: how open-source code can advance training of animal scientists.Journal of animal science · 2023Article
- Enabling FAIR data in Earth and environmental science with community-centric (meta)data reporting formats.Scientific data · 2022Article
- Integrating open science education into an undergraduate health professional research program.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2022Article
- A guide to open science practices for animal research.PLoS biology · 2022Article
- Declaration of common standards for the preregistration of animal research-speeding up the scientific progress.PNAS nexus · 2022Article
- Dynamics of cumulative advantage and threats to equity in open science: a scoping review.Royal Society open science · 2022Article
- Next-generation field courses: Integrating Open Science and online learning.Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Can mindfulness mechanistically target worry to improve sleep disturbances? Theory and study protocol for app-based anxiety program.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2020Article
- A randomized controlled trial protocol for engaging distress tolerance and working memory to aid smoking cessation in low socioeconomic status (SES) adults.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An important hallmark of science is the transparency and reproducibility of scientific results. Over the last few years, internet-based technologies have emerged that allow for a representation of the scientific process that goes far beyond traditional methods and analysis descriptions. Using these often freely available tools requires a suite of skills that is not necessarily part of a curriculum in the life sciences. However, funders, journals, and policy makers increasingly require researchers to ensure complete reproducibility of their methods and analyses. To close this gap, we designed an introductory course that guides students towards a reproducible science workflow. Here, we outline the course content and possible extensions, report encountered challenges, and discuss how to integrate such a course in existing curricula.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.