Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31017929›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

The lab management practices of "Research Exemplars" that foster research rigor and regulatory compliance: A qualitative study of successful principal investigators.

Alison L Antes, Ashley Kuykendall, James M DuBois

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The burnout: a silent saboteur in in vitro fertilization laboratories.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Biosafety, biosecurity, and bioethics.Monash bioethics review · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

3 authors.

Alison L AntesDivision of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-2632-7701
Ashley KuykendallDivision of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
James M DuBoisDivision of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.

Funding

WU INSTITUTE OF CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCESUL1TR002345 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI William G. Powderly · 2017 to 2026
$97.8M
FOSTERING INTEGRITY AND SOCIETAL IMPACT IN GENOMICS THROUGH MANAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICESK01HG008990 · NHGRI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI ANTES, ALISON L · 2016 to 2020
$599k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002345NHGRI NIH HHS K01 HG008990
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionConducting rigorous scientific inquiry within the bounds of research regulation and acceptable practice requires a principal investigator to lead and manage research processes and personnel. This study explores the practices used by investigators nominated as exemplars of research excellence and integrity to produce rigorous, reproducible research and comply with research regulations.

methodsUsing a qualitative research design, we interviewed 52 principal investigators working in the United States at top research universities and the National Institutes of Health Intramural Research Program. We solicited nominations of researchers meeting two criteria: (1) they are federally-funded researchers doing high-quality, high-impact research, and (2) have reputations for professionalism and integrity. Each investigator received an initial nomination addressing both criteria and at least one additional endorsement corroborating criteria 2. A panel of researchers and our research team reviewed the nominations to select finalists who were invited to participate. The cohort of "Research Exemplars" includes highly accomplished researchers in diverse scientific disciplines. The semi-structured interview questions asked them to describe the routine practices they employ to foster rigor and regulatory compliance. We used inductive thematic analysis to identify common practices.

resultsThe exemplars identified a core set of 8 practices and provided strategies for employing them. The practices included holding regular team meetings, encouraging shared ownership, providing supervision, ensuring adequate training, fostering positive attitudes about compliance, scrutinizing data and findings, and following standard operating procedures. Above all, the use of these practices aim to create a psychologically safe work environment in which lab members openly collaborate to scrutinize their work and share in accountability for rigorous, compliant research.

conclusionsResearchers typically receive limited systematic training in how to lead and manage their research teams. Training and education for principal investigators should include essential leadership and management practices and strategies that support doing high-quality research with integrity.

Indexed as

LeadershipResearch PersonnelAdultBiomedical ResearchFemaleFinancing, GovernmentHumansMaleMiddle AgedNational Institutes of Health (U.S.)ProfessionalismQualitative ResearchReproducibility of ResultsResearch Support as TopicUnited States

Identifiers

PMID31017929
PMCPMC6481787
OpenAlexW2941653762

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.