Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42575938›Full record

ReviewNature human behaviour2026

Open practices across science, software, education and other domains.

John Meluso, Cassandra Chambers, Richard Littauer, Nerea Llamas, Elizabeth Long Lingo, Marlene Mhangami, Beck Pitt, Violetta Splitter, Huajin Wang

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature human behaviour, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

John MelusoSystems Engineering Program, Duffield College of Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA. john.meluso@cornell.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8200-8150
Cassandra ChambersCarey School of Business, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6222-0920
Richard LittauerTe Kura Mātai Pūkaha, Pūrorohiko School of Engineering & Computer Science, Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington, Te Whanganui-a-Tara Wellington, Aotearoa New Zealand.
Nerea LlamasUniversity Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7714-2475
Elizabeth Long LingoThe Business School, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6862-1642
Marlene MhangamiMicrosoft Corporation, London, UK.
Beck PittInstitute of Educational Technology, The Open University (UK), Milton Keynes, UK.
Violetta SplitterSaïd Business School, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9112-0929
Huajin WangUniversity Libraries, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0121-4257

Funding

Alfred P. Sloan Foundation G-2024-22498National Science Foundation (NSF) BCS-2332598
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Open practices are actions people perform to influence transparency (who can see information), inclusion (who can voice perspectives) and decision rights (who can make decisions). Open practices have grown popular across domains, including open science, open-source software and open education, in hopes of spurring innovation and broadening participation. But which open practices best enable groups and organizations to achieve these ambitious goals, and why? This Perspective distils seven successful practices from across these domains that can help groups to define goals, allocate power, share information and set norms. These practices, such as documenting power structures and adopting a code of conduct, hold potential to support groups and organizations seeking to address great challenges through openness. However, delivering on that potential will depend on how well groups share lessons across domains, tailor these practices and sustain the people and platforms that carry them.

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.