Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40811741›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2025

Ten simple rules for leading a many-author non-empirical paper.

Tracey L Weissgerber, Natascha Drude, Rima-Maria Rahal, Friederike E Kohrs

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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.

Tracey L WeissgerberBerlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin, QUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7490-2600
Natascha DrudeBerlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin, QUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7153-2894
Rima-Maria RahalMax Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1404-0471
Friederike E KohrsBerlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin, QUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0009-0004-5696-9459

Funding

Wellcome Trust 218358
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many-author non-empirical papers include recommendations or consensus statements, catalogs of ideas, roadmaps for future research, calls to action, or "how to" articles. These papers have great potential to change the conversation or address unmet needs within research communities. Large, diverse authorship teams can create valuable resources that no individual co-author could create independently. Achieving these goals, however, requires a very different approach than researchers typically use to prepare papers with fewer authors. In the process we describe, a small team of lead writers typically leads the content generation and writing processes. Many co-authors collaborate to create content and provide feedback throughout the writing process. Lead writers face many challenges, including defining the content and structure of the paper, coordinating complex logistics, preparing themselves and co-authors for a unique writing experience, and managing high-volume feedback. Here, we outline ten simple rules for leading a many-author non-empirical paper. These rules guide readers through the content generation and writing processes and highlight practical solutions to common challenges. While these rules were developed by preparing non-empirical papers with at least 30 authors, some rules may apply to research papers or non-empirical papers with fewer authors. Lead writers can also use our companion paper, which shares ten simple rules for being a co-author on a many-author non-empirical paper, to prepare co-authors for an efficient and effective collaborative process.

Indexed as

AuthorshipPublishingWritingCooperative BehaviorHumans

Identifiers

PMID40811741
PMCPMC12352843

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.