ArticleeNeuro
Questionable Research Practices, Low Statistical Power, and Other Obstacles to Replicability: Why Preclinical Neuroscience Research Would Benefit from Registered Reports.
Article in eNeuro. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pharmacotherapeutic Management of Depression in Patients With Cancer: A Review of Mechanistic and Clinical Evidence.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Review
- Shaping the Field: A Review of the Use of Theory in Research on Research Integrity.Science and engineering ethics · 2026Review
- PRISME: A MATLAB Toolbox For Large Data-Driven Multimodal Power Benchmarking.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Ending publication bias: A values-based approach to surface null and negative results.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- How Transparent and Reproducible Are Studies That Use Animal Models of Opioid Addiction?Addiction biology · 2025Article
- How will developmental neuroimaging contribute to the prediction of neurodevelopmental or psychiatric disorders? Challenges and opportunities.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2025Article
- Depressive symptoms during the transition to adolescence: Left hippocampal volume as a marker of social context sensitivity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Selective in vitro Synergistic Evaluation of Probiotic Tolerant morpholinyl- and 4-ethylpiperazinyl-Imidazole-chalcone Derivatives on Gastrointestinal System Pathogens.Current microbiology · 2024Article
- Current Best Practices for Analysis of Dendritic Spine Morphology and Number in Neurodevelopmental Disorder Research.ACS chemical neuroscience · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Replicability, the degree to which a previous scientific finding can be repeated in a distinct set of data, has been considered an integral component of institutionalized scientific practice since its inception several hundred years ago. In the past decade, large-scale replication studies have demonstrated that replicability is far from favorable, across multiple scientific fields. Here, I evaluate this literature and describe contributing factors including the prevalence of questionable research practices (QRPs), misunderstanding of
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.