ArticlePLoS biology2023
Open Science 2.0: Towards a truly collaborative research ecosystem.
Article in PLoS biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- TRIPOD+AI statement: updated guidance for reporting clinical prediction models that use regression or machine learning methods: a Korean translation.Ewha medical journal · 2025Guideline
- Fostering cultural change in research through innovative knowledge sharing, evaluation, and community engagement strategies.NPJ science of learning · 2026Review
- Towards a decentralized future for open-science databases.Nature genetics · 2026Article
- Collaboration under pressure: sustaining One Health research teams in a post-COVID environment.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026Article
- Grand challenges for systems neuroscience: perspectives and opportunities.Frontiers in systems neuroscience · 2026Article
- Integrative Bioinformatics Approaches in Environmental Biotechnology: A Review.TheScientificWorldJournal · 2026Review
- Sepsis and septic shock case identification from electronic health records: an open-source workflow and comparison of cohorts by criteria.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
- Article
- Hydroxychloroquine use during the first COVID-19 wave: a case study highlighting the urgent need to enhance research practices within the publication ecosystem.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- Novelty, Consistency, Transparency: The Trilemma of Psychological Sciences and its Consequences on Open Science Practices.International review of social psychology · 2025Article
- Challenging the status quo: A guide to open and reproducible neuroimaging for early career researchers.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- A century of weekly notifiable disease incidence data by province in Canada.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Clarifying middle authorship contributions to reduce abuses in science publishing and assessment of top-ranked SJR biochemistry and pharmacology journals' authorship criteria.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2024Article
- Do randomised clinical trials on dental caries adopt Open Science practices?BMC oral health · 2024Article
- TRIPOD+AI statement: updated guidance for reporting clinical prediction models that use regression or machine learning methods.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2024Article
- Accelerating the open research agenda to solve global challenges.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Editorial: Highlights in psycho-oncology: study protocols - improving evidence for future personalised cancer care.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Demystifying Open Science in health psychology and behavioral medicine: a practical guide to Registered Reports and Data Notes.Health psychology and behavioral medicine · 2024Article
- PLOS Biology at 20: Exploring possible futures.PLoS biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Conversations about open science have reached the mainstream, yet many open science practices such as data sharing remain uncommon. Our efforts towards openness therefore need to increase in scale and aim for a more ambitious target. We need an ecosystem not only where research outputs are openly shared but also in which transparency permeates the research process from the start and lends itself to more rigorous and collaborative research. To support this vision, this Essay provides an overview of a selection of open science initiatives from the past 2 decades, focusing on methods transparency, scholarly communication, team science, and research culture, and speculates about what the future of open science could look like. It then draws on these examples to provide recommendations for how funders, institutions, journals, regulators, and other stakeholders can create an environment that is ripe for improvement.
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.