Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38234442›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2024

Replicability of simulation studies for the investigation of statistical methods: the RepliSims project.

K Luijken, A Lohmann, U Alter, J Claramunt Gonzalez, F J Clouth, J L Fossum, L Hesen, A H J Huizing, J Ketelaar, A K Montoya and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

16 authors.

K LuijkenDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5192-8368
A LohmannDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
U AlterDepartment of Psychology, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
J Claramunt GonzalezMethodology and Statistics Unit, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
F J ClouthDepartment of Methodology and Statistics, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
J L FossumDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
L HesenDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
A H J HuizingTNO (Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research), Expertise Group Child Health, Leiden, The Netherlands.
J KetelaarDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
A K MontoyaDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9316-8184
L NabDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
R C C NijmanDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
B B L Penning de VriesDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
T D TibbeDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Y A WangDepartment of Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
R H H GroenwoldDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Results of simulation studies evaluating the performance of statistical methods can have a major impact on the way empirical research is implemented. However, so far there is limited evidence of the replicability of simulation studies. Eight highly cited statistical simulation studies were selected, and their replicability was assessed by teams of replicators with formal training in quantitative methodology. The teams used information in the original publications to write simulation code with the aim of replicating the results. The primary outcome was to determine the feasibility of replicability based on reported information in the original publications and supplementary materials. Replicasility varied greatly: some original studies provided detailed information leading to almost perfect replication of results, whereas other studies did not provide enough information to implement any of the reported simulations. Factors facilitating replication included availability of code, detailed reporting or visualization of data-generating procedures and methods, and replicator expertise. Replicability of statistical simulation studies was mainly impeded by lack of information and sustainability of information sources. We encourage researchers publishing simulation studies to transparently report all relevant implementation details either in the research paper itself or in easily accessible supplementary material and to make their simulation code publicly available using permanent links.

Indexed as

open materialsreplicationsimulation studiesstatistical methods

Identifiers

PMID38234442
PMCPMC10791519

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.