ArticlePLoS computational biology2020
Ten simple rules on how to write a standard operating procedure.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality assessment and control of unprocessed anatomical, functional and diffusion MRI of the human brain using MRIQC.Nature protocols · 2026Review
- Antimicrobial resistance in veterinary medicine: Mechanisms, regulation and control strategies.Veterinarni medicina · 2026Review
- What needs to be standardized for reliable, reproducible, and robust tractography?GigaScience · 2026Review
- Beyond the Limits: How Is Spectral Flow Cytometry Reshaping the Clinical Landscape and What Is Coming Next?Cells · 2025Review
- Employee Management in Dairy Farms Associated with Bulk Tank Somatic Cell Count and New Mastitis Infection Risk.Veterinary sciences · 2024Article
- Ten simple rules for implementing a successful field season.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Review
- Learning curve analysis of transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic hysterectomy combined under the standard operating procedure.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2022Article
- Transgender data collection in the electronic health record: Current concepts and issues.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022Article
- Approaches for the isolation and long-term expansion of pericytes from human and animal tissues.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Management Solutions for the Restructuring of Laboratories Associated to the Sentinel Services for Syphilis and Other STIs.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Ten simple rules to cultivate transdisciplinary collaboration in data science.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research publications and data nowadays should be publicly available on the internet and, theoretically, usable for everyone to develop further research, products, or services. The long-term accessibility of research data is, therefore, fundamental in the economy of the research production process. However, the availability of data is not sufficient by itself, but also their quality must be verifiable. Measures to ensure reuse and reproducibility need to include the entire research life cycle, from the experimental design to the generation of data, quality control, statistical analysis, interpretation, and validation of the results. Hence, high-quality records, particularly for providing a string of documents for the verifiable origin of data, are essential elements that can act as a certificate for potential users (customers). These records also improve the traceability and transparency of data and processes, therefore, improving the reliability of results. Standards for data acquisition, analysis, and documentation have been fostered in the last decade driven by grassroot initiatives of researchers and organizations such as the Research Data Alliance (RDA). Nevertheless, what is still largely missing in the life science academic research are agreed procedures for complex routine research workflows. Here, well-crafted documentation like standard operating procedures (SOPs) offer clear direction and instructions specifically designed to avoid deviations as an absolute necessity for reproducibility. Therefore, this paper provides a standardized workflow that explains step by step how to write an SOP to be used as a starting point for appropriate research documentation.
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.