Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39114051›Full record

ReviewHeliyon2024

Reproducibility in chemistry research.

Rosaria Ciriminna, Giuseppe Angellotti, Giovanna Li Petri, Mario Pagliaro

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Heliyon, 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. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

4 authors.

Rosaria CiriminnaIstituto per lo Studio dei Materiali Nanostrutturati, CNR, via U. La Malfa 153, 90146, Palermo, Italy.
Giuseppe AngellottiIstituto per lo Studio dei Materiali Nanostrutturati, CNR, via U. La Malfa 153, 90146, Palermo, Italy.
Giovanna Li PetriIstituto per lo Studio dei Materiali Nanostrutturati, CNR, via U. La Malfa 153, 90146, Palermo, Italy.
Mario PagliaroIstituto per lo Studio dei Materiali Nanostrutturati, CNR, via U. La Malfa 153, 90146, Palermo, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chemistry is a reproducible science whose pillars - synthesis and analysis - actually comprise a huge collection of highly reproducible experimental methods to synthesize and analyze substances. The historical development of chemistry, furthermore, shows that reproducibility of methods has been the companion of novelty and creative innovation. The "publish or perish" principle dominating global academia since over two decades, however, intrinsically contributes to the publication of non-reproducible research outcomes also in chemistry. A study on reproducibility of chemistry research seems therefore timely, especially now that chemists are slowly but inevitably adopting open science and its tools such as the preprint, open access, and data sharing. We conclude presenting three simple guidelines for enhanced publication of research findings in chemistry.

Indexed as

Hype in chemistryIntellectual humilityOpen scienceReproducibility in chemistryScientific publishing

Identifiers

PMID39114051
PMCPMC11305220

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.