ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2022
Examining the generalizability of research findings from archival data.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Association of cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein, and glucose index and modified indices in predicting cardiovascular diseases incidence among population with cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome stages 0-3: a nationwide prospective cohort study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Overdose Prevention Centers and Neighborhood Commercial Activity in New York City.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Beyond reweighting: On the predictive role of covariate shift in effect generalization.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- A competitive edge: how social cues and spatial congruence influence joint attention in addressed or witnessed interactions.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Examining the replicability of online experiments selected by a decision market.Nature human behaviour · 2025Article
- Reproducibility and replicability in research: What 452 professors think in Universities across the USA and India.PloS one · 2025Article
- Can large language models help predict results from a complex behavioural science study?Royal Society open science · 2024Article
- Heterogeneity in effect size estimates.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- A guide for social science journal editors on easing into open science.Research integrity and peer review · 2024Article
- The replication crisis has led to positive structural, procedural, and community changes.Communications psychology · 2023Review
- Teaching open and reproducible scholarship: a critical review of the evidence base for current pedagogical methods and their outcomes.Royal Society open science · 2023Review
- Examining the generalizability of research findings from archival data.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This initiative examined systematically the extent to which a large set of archival research findings generalizes across contexts. We repeated the key analyses for 29 original strategic management effects in the same context (direct reproduction) as well as in 52 novel time periods and geographies; 45% of the reproductions returned results matching the original reports together with 55% of tests in different spans of years and 40% of tests in novel geographies. Some original findings were associated with multiple new tests. Reproducibility was the best predictor of generalizability-for the findings that proved directly reproducible, 84% emerged in other available time periods and 57% emerged in other geographies. Overall, only limited empirical evidence emerged for context sensitivity. In a forecasting survey, independent scientists were able to anticipate which effects would find support in tests in new samples.
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.