Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37387150›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2023

Reprohackathons: promoting reproducibility in bioinformatics through training.

Thomas Cokelaer, Sarah Cohen-Boulakia, Frédéric Lemoine

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

3 authors.

Thomas CokelaerInstitut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, Plate-Forme Technologique Biomics, 75015 Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0001-6286-1138
Sarah Cohen-BoulakiaUniversité Paris-Saclay, CNRS, Laboratoire Interdisciplinaire des Sciences du Numérique, 91405 Orsay, France.ORCID 0000-0002-7439-1441
Frédéric LemoineInstitut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, Bioinformatics and Biostatistics Hub, 75015 Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0001-9576-4449

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationThe reproducibility crisis has highlighted the importance of improving the way bioinformatics data analyses are implemented, executed, and shared. To address this, various tools such as content versioning systems, workflow management systems, and software environment management systems have been developed. While these tools are becoming more widely used, there is still much work to be done to increase their adoption. The most effective way to ensure reproducibility becomes a standard part of most bioinformatics data analysis projects is to integrate it into the curriculum of bioinformatics Master's programs.

resultsIn this article, we present the Reprohackathon, a Master's course that we have been running for the last 3 years at Université Paris-Saclay (France), and that has been attended by a total of 123 students. The course is divided into two parts. The first part includes lessons on the challenges related to reproducibility, content versioning systems, container management, and workflow systems. In the second part, students work on a data analysis project for 3-4 months, reanalyzing data from a previously published study. The Reprohackaton has taught us many valuable lessons, such as the fact that implementing reproducible analyses is a complex and challenging task that requires significant effort. However, providing in-depth teaching of the concepts and the tools during a Master's degree program greatly improves students' understanding and abilities in this area.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyCurriculumData AnalysisHumansReproducibility of ResultsSoftware

Identifiers

PMID37387150
PMCPMC10311340

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.