Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33948232›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2020

Workshop on reproducibility in research.

Michael Kalichman, Paul J Mills

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Michael KalichmanResearch Ethics Program, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4268-1188
Paul J MillsFamily Medicine and Public Health, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, concern about research reproducibility has increased dramatically for scientists, funders of research, and the general public. With a view to explicitly address what is often called a reproducibility crisis and putting the focus on research being done by individual trainees, a two-hour workshop was developed and introduced into six courses at UC San Diego. Participation in the workshop resulted in a statistically significant increase in the number of different types of strategies identified by the trainees for fostering reproducibility. The findings are consistent with having increased awareness of strategies to promote reproducibility.

Indexed as

educationgood practices of researchReproducibilityresearch ethicsresponsible conduct of research

Identifiers

PMID33948232
PMCPMC8057479

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.