Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32687534›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Development of the Biological Variation In Experimental Design And Analysis (BioVEDA) assessment.

Jenna Hicks, Jessica Dewey, Yaniv Brandvain, Anita Schuchardt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Jenna HicksDepartment of Biology Teaching and Learning, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-4486-9926
Jessica DeweyDepartment of Biology Teaching and Learning, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of America.
Yaniv BrandvainDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, United States of America.
Anita SchuchardtDepartment of Biology Teaching and Learning, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Variation is an important concept that underlies experimental design and data analysis. Incomplete understanding of variation can preclude students from designing experiments that adequately manage organismal and experimental variation, and from accurately conducting and interpreting statistical analyses of data. Because of the lack of assessment instruments that measure students' ideas about variation in the context of biological investigations, we developed the Biological Variation in Experimental Design and Analysis (BioVEDA) assessment. Psychometric analyses indicate that BioVEDA assessment scores are reliable/precise. We provide evidence that the BioVEDA instrument can be used to evaluate students' understanding of biological variation in the context of experimental design and analysis relative to other students and to their prior scores.

Indexed as

Research DesignAnalysis of VarianceHumansModels, TheoreticalPsychometrics

Identifiers

PMID32687534
PMCPMC7371189

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.