Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35590337›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2022

Trinity review: integrating Registered Reports with research ethics and funding reviews.

Yuki Mori, Kaito Takashima, Kohei Ueda, Kyoshiro Sasaki, Yuki Yamada

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Yuki Mori *Graduate School of Human-Environment Studies, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Nishi-ku, Fukuoka, 819-0395, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8783-6382
Kaito Takashima *Graduate School of Human-Environment Studies, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Nishi-ku, Fukuoka, 819-0395, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7489-5682
Kohei UedaGraduate School of Human-Environment Studies, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Nishi-ku, Fukuoka, 819-0395, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1818-8366
Kyoshiro SasakiFaculty of Informatics, Kansai University, 2-1-1, Ryozenji-cho, Takatsuki, Osaka, 569-1095, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5496-3748
Yuki YamadaFaculty of Arts and Science, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Nishi-ku, Fukuoka, 819-0395, Japan. yamadayuk@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1431-568X

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science JP16H03079Japan Society for the Promotion of Science JP17H00875Japan Society for the Promotion of Science JP18K12015Japan Society for the Promotion of Science JP19K14482Japan Society for the Promotion of Science JP20H04581Japan Society for the Promotion of Science JP21H03784
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One major source of exhaustion for researchers is the redundant paperwork of three different documents-research papers, ethics review applications, and research grant applications-for the same research plan. This is a wasteful and redundant process for researchers, and it has a more direct impact on the career development of early-career researchers. Here, we propose a trinity review system based on Registered Reports that integrates scientific, ethics, and research funding reviews. In our proposed trinity review system, scientific and ethics reviews are undertaken concurrently for a research protocol before running the study. After the protocol is approved in principle through these review processes, a funding review will take place, and the researchers will begin their research. Following the experiments or surveys, the scientific review will be conducted on a completed version of the paper again, including the results and discussions (i.e., the full paper), and the full paper will be published once it has passed the second review. This paper provides the brief process of the trinity review system and discusses the need for and benefits of the proposed system. Although the trinity review system only applies to a few appropriate disciplines, it helps improve reproducibility and integrity.

Indexed as

Research DesignResearch PersonnelEthics, ResearchHumansReproducibility of ResultsResearch Support as TopicAcademic publishingPeer reviewRegistered ReportsResearch ethicsResearch grantsReview system

Identifiers

PMID35590337
PMCPMC9118676

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.