ArticleOpen research Europe2023
Scoping review and evidence mapping of interventions aimed at improving reproducible and replicable science: Protocol.
Article in Open research Europe, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- An international consensus on core reproducibility items in research.PLoS biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Open science interventions to improve reproducibility and replicability of research: a scoping review.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Many interventions, especially those linked to open science, have been proposed to improve reproducibility in science. To what extent these propositions are based on scientific evidence from empirical evaluations is not clear. Aims: The primary objective is to identify Open Science interventions that have been formally investigated regarding their influence on reproducibility and replicability. A secondary objective is to list any facilitators or barriers reported and to identify gaps in the evidence. Methods: We will search broadly by using electronic bibliographic databases, broad internet search, and contacting experts in the field of reproducibility, replicability, and open science. Any study investigating interventions for their influence on the reproducibility and replicability of research will be selected, including those studies additionally investigating drivers and barriers to the implementation and effectiveness of interventions. Studies will first be selected by title and abstract (if available) and then by reading the full text by at least two independent reviewers. We will analyze existing scientific evidence using scoping review and evidence gap mapping methodologies. Results: The results will be presented in interactive evidence maps, summarized in a narrative synthesis, and serve as input for subsequent research. Review registration: This protocol has been pre-registered on OSF under doi https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/D65YS.
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.