Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33740292›Full record

ArticleCurrent protocols2021

How to Conduct Responsible Research: A Guide for Graduate Students.

Alison L Antes, Leonard B Maggi

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current protocols, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Alison L AntesDepartment of Medicine, Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Leonard B MaggiDepartment of Medicine, Division of Molecular Oncology, Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.

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 TR002345NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002345NHGRI NIH HHS K01 HG008990NHGRI NIH HHS K01HG008990
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Researchers must conduct research responsibly for it to have an impact and to safeguard trust in science. Essential responsibilities of researchers include using rigorous, reproducible research methods, reporting findings in a trustworthy manner, and giving the researchers who contributed appropriate authorship credit. This "how-to" guide covers strategies and practices for doing reproducible research and being a responsible author. The article also covers how to utilize decision-making strategies when uncertain about the best way to proceed in a challenging situation. The advice focuses especially on graduate students, but is appropriate for undergraduates and experienced researchers. It begins with an overview of responsible conduct of research, research misconduct, and ethical behavior in the scientific workplace. The takeaway message is that responsible conduct of research requires a thoughtful approach to doing research in order to ensure trustworthy results and conclusions, and that researchers receive fair credit. © 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Indexed as

AuthorshipScientific MisconductHumansMoralsResearch PersonnelStudentsauthorshipgraduate studentspublicationreproducibilityresearch ethicsresearch integrityresponsible conduct of researchrigorscientific integrity

Identifiers

PMID33740292
PMCPMC8277481

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.