ArticleResearch integrity and peer review2025
Using reporting guidelines to improve the reproducibility of cooking Christmas tree meringues: the "People tasting trees" cluster-randomised controlled trial.
Article in Research integrity and peer review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Public engagement with research reproducibility.PLoS biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo test whether improving a Christmas tree meringue recipe using reporting guidelines yields more appealing and sweeter meringues.
designA prospective, superiority, single-blind, cluster-randomised (1:1) controlled trial.
settingA public participatory event in a large cultural facility in France.
participantsBudding chefs with basic culinary skills, possessing the utensils necessary for baking Christmas tree meringues, and not having burned pasta in the past month (for safety reasons). Bunding chefs represent the cluster and meringue the unit.
interventionsEach budding chef was randomised to a standard recipe for making Christmas tree meringues or to the same recipe written in consultation with a professional baker using the TIDieR checklist-a reporting guideline for description of complex interventions-plus a short video tutorial.
main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was reproducibility in terms of visual aspect. Secondary outcomes included colour, size, taste and survival time in the course of a sale organised as part of the public event. The visual aspect, colour and size was rated by an independent jury which compared the cooked Christmas tree meringues with the recipe picture on a scale from 1 to 10. Analyses were performed in intention-to-eat (randomization unit: budding chefs / analysis unit: Christmas trees).
results60 budding chefs (30 in each group) baked a total of 845 Christmas tree meringues. There was no significant difference between the groups (mean difference = -0.1; [95%CI -0.99; 0.80]; p-value = 0.84; intra-cluster correlation, ICC = 0.77) on visual aspect. No difference was found for reproducibility in terms of colour (mean difference = -0.31; [95%CI -0.97; 0.35]; p-value = 0.35; ICC = 0.67) or size (mean difference = -0.17; [95%CI -1.07; 0.73]; p-value = 0.71; ICC = 0.74). There was no significant difference in terms of taste between the groups (mean difference = -0.55; [95%CI -1.62; 0.52]; p-value = 0.31). 400 meringues were sold during the public event with no difference in survival time between groups (hazard ratio = 1.26 [95% CI 0.75-2.09], p-value = 0.38, with values > 1 in favour of the control group). e.g. 75% survived for 134 min in intervention group and for 124 min in the control group.
conclusionsOur study failed to demonstrate that an improved recipe using the TIDieR reporting guideline with a video tutorial improved the reproducibility in terms of visual aspect, colour, size, taste and sales for Christmas tree meringues. The best way to succeed in reproducing Christmas tree meringues alike those showcased by the recipe-and thereby to improve reproducibility of experiments-remains a mystery still to be solved by further explorations.
trial registrationhttps://osf.io/dnhbx .
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.