Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34930427›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2021

Improving research quality: the view from the UK Reproducibility Network institutional leads for research improvement.

Andrew J Stewart, Emily K Farran, James A Grange, Malcolm Macleod, Marcus Munafò, Phil Newton, David R Shanks, UKRN Institutional Leads

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

Andrew J StewartUniversity of Manchester, Manchester, UK. andrew.j.stewart@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9795-4104
Emily K FarranUniversity of Surrey, Surrey, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6409-0875
James A GrangeKeele University, Keele, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8352-8390
Malcolm MacleodUniversity of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9187-9839
Marcus MunafòUniversity of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4049-993X
Phil NewtonUniversity of Reading, Reading, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7658-4204
David R ShanksUniversity College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4600-6323
UKRN Institutional Leads

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The adoption and incentivisation of open and transparent research practices is critical in addressing issues around research reproducibility and research integrity. These practices will require training and funding. Individuals need to be incentivised to adopt open and transparent research practices (e.g., added as desirable criteria in hiring, probation, and promotion decisions, recognition that funded research should be conducted openly and transparently, the importance of publishers mandating the publication of research workflows and appropriately curated data associated with each research output). Similarly, institutions need to be incentivised to encourage the adoption of open and transparent practices by researchers. Research quality should be prioritised over research quantity. As research transparency will look different for different disciplines, there can be no one-size-fits-all approach. An outward looking and joined up UK research strategy is needed that places openness and transparency at the heart of research activity. This should involve key stakeholders (institutions, research organisations, funders, publishers, and Government) and crucially should be focused on action. Failure to do this will have negative consequences not just for UK research, but also for our ability to innovate and subsequently commercialise UK-led discovery.

Indexed as

GovernmentResearch DesignHumansReproducibility of ResultsUnited KingdomFAIR dataResearch opennessResearch reproducibilityResearch transparency

Identifiers

PMID34930427
PMCPMC8686561

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.