Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38244174›Full record

ArticleIrish journal of medical science2024

Prioritizing open science in space medicine: perspectives following the NASA "Transform to Open Science (TOPS)" Curriculum.

Ethan Waisberg, Joshua Ong, Andrew G Lee

Abstract readLetter
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Is any research ever truly bias-free? The myth of objectivity in science.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
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.

Ethan WaisbergDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. ew690@cam.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8999-0212
Joshua OngDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan Kellogg Eye Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Andrew G LeeCenter for Space Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has recently made a long-term commitment towards fostering open science. The NASA Transform to Open Science (TOPS) initiative provides recommendations, best practices, and tools related to open science. The principles of open science include the transparent sharing of data, findings, and methods and is designed to accelerate the pace of discovery and foster collaboration. The goal of open science is to allow data, publications, software, and physical samples to be accessible to all, regardless of being a professional or an amateur. In this paper, we summarize several key points open science that were presented as part of NASA's Open Science 101 Module 1 at an in-person training event in Washington, D.C., and include how open science can be beneficial for researchers and society as a whole.

Indexed as

Aerospace MedicineUnited States National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationCurriculumHumansInformation DisseminationUnited StatesMicrogravityOpen scienceSpaceflightSpace medicine

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.