Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

3 Approaches to Cultivate Transparent Reporting in Biomedical Research
Pages 17-34

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 17...
... • Tenure evaluation criteria should be restructured so that value is placed on an investigator's efforts toward reproduc ibility and transparency (e.g., consider the rigor of research studies or whether published findings have been replicated by others)
From page 18...
... Arturo Casadevall, professor of molecular microbiology and immunol BOX 3-1 Workshop Session Objectives • Highlight current efforts by researchers, institutions, funders, and journals to increase transparency in proposing and reporting preclinical biomedical research. • Discuss the incentives, disincentives, challenges, and opportunities for re searchers when it comes to transparent reporting of preclinical biomedical research (e.g., pressure to publish, institutional resources, training, funding)
From page 19...
... . EARLY CAREER INVESTIGATOR PERSPECTIVE Yarimar Carrasquillo, Investigator, National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health Carrasquillo emphasized the importance of targeting younger investigators, not only early career faculty and researchers, but also undergraduate students, graduate students, and postdoctoral fellows, when working to raise awareness about the need for transparent reporting of biomedical research.
From page 20...
... The inability to replicate the prior studies also raises concerns about the validity of the animal models of affective behavior, which she said impacts the ability to translate findings to clinical research. By contrast, there were other models and methods that Carrasquillo wanted to incorporate into her program that she said were easy to replicate because there were detailed methods papers available (some with videos)
From page 21...
... Although some senior faculty are understanding of replicability challenges and supportive of rigor and quality, it is not clear if a tenure committee would reward high-quality research that resulted in fewer publications. Creating a Culture Change Carrasquillo offered the following solutions to help overcome some of the obstacles that early career investigators face: • Restructure tenure evaluation criteria so that efforts toward repro ducibility and transparency are valued (e.g., methods papers, nega tive data)
From page 22...
... She also observed that her field has not yet embraced preregistration of studies. CULTURE CHANGE ORGANIZATION PERSPECTIVE Brian Nosek, Co-Founder, Center for Open Science The experiences described by Carrasquillo are not limited to early career researchers.
From page 23...
... In fact, Nosek explained, although scientists "collectively endorse the norms of science over the counternorms," the culture of science is "self-interested," with individuals focusing on advancing their own careers through "publishing in the right journals, presenting the right results, selectively reporting, and ignoring negative results." Changing the Research Culture Individual researchers, universities, publishers, funders, scientific societies, and other stakeholders populate the complex, decentralized ecosystem of scientific research. Nosek said that "all groups contribute to the incentives and reward structure and all are influenced by it." Coordination and cooperation are needed to bring about cultural change.
From page 24...
... Nosek reported that "about 60 percent of the articles that have been published so far through Registered Reports have negative results as their primary outcome," and these papers are cited as frequently as other articles. Finally, at the policy level, the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP)
From page 25...
... Most of the problematic images identified were the result of errors, but 10 percent of the publications with problematic images were retracted. Based on the number of retractions, estimates showed that as many as 35,000 published papers could have images that 2 Further information on the OSF Registries, Open Science Badges, Registered Reports, and TOP is available on the Center for Open Science website, https://cos.io (accessed November 20, 2019)
From page 26...
... Reducing Errors in Publications An emerging option in biomedical publication is the ability to publicly post a preprint of the manuscript prior to peer review. Preprints increase transparency and allow researchers to rapidly share findings, but they can also help to catch errors before papers are published.
From page 27...
... Casadevall expressed concern, for example, that publishing a problematic paper in a highimpact journal is still better for one's career advancement than publishing a rigorous paper in a lower tier journal, and this is unacceptable, he said.
From page 28...
... As a publicly funded research agency, NIH is accountable to the public, and transparency is a tool for demonstrating that NIH is a good steward of taxpayer dollars and is worthy of the public's trust. Wolinetz gave several examples of why transparency matters to scientists, the public, and research participants (see Box 3-3)
From page 29...
... NIH released "Proposed Provisions for a Draft NIH Data Management and Sharing Policy" in 2018 to gather input that would inform the development of the draft policy. Wolinetz anticipated that a draft policy would be released for public comment in October 2019, with the intention of finalizing a policy in early 2020.4 Angela Abitua, outreach scientist at Addgene, asked whether the forthcoming NIH policy on responsible data sharing will address the reporting and sharing of biological materials, such as plasmids, antibodies, and cell lines, which are used in the experiments.
From page 30...
... Wolinetz pointed out that a large amount of NIH-funded research involves animal models, which she said are "incredibly important for advancing our understanding of biology and seeking new treatments for human diseases." Rigor in the design and conduct of experiments using animal models relates not only to designing appropriately powered experiments, but also to whether the animal model chosen is the best model to address the research question. Wolinetz noted that addressing rigor in animal research presents cultural challenges.
From page 31...
... The challenge of assessing quality instead of quantity, however, is reaching consensus on what constitutes quality, and how the quality of a candidate's publications can be assessed efficiently and consistently given that several individuals will each read one paper and write their analysis and recommendation. He observed that peer reviews of a given manuscript submitted for publication can vary widely.
From page 32...
... Casadevall noted that he has published in JoVE and Carrasquillo said that a JoVE paper contributed to the successful replication of a method by her laboratory, but both agreed that the weight of publications in JoVE and other journals of its type is lower than for publications in higher impact journals despite the valuable contribution of JoVE papers to replicability and training. Guna Rajagopal, vice president of computational sciences, discovery science at Janssen R&D, shared that they and other pharmaceutical research programs often contact the authors of publications to discuss their studies and send company scientists to the authors' laboratories for several months to work together to address any issues and to reproduce the data, with support from the company.
From page 33...
... He encouraged researchers to work within the system, gathering data on published errors, publishing them in peer-reviewed journals, and only then discussing the findings publicly, as was done with the analysis of figure problems he described. Wolinetz agreed that many people are hesitant to call out bad behavior by others because the culture in science places extremely high value on reputation.
From page 34...
... 34 ENHANCING SCIENTIFIC REPRODUCIBILITY Wolinetz added that the practical realities and downstream consequences of implementing any policy need to be recognized. "Are we willing to pay for the values that we are espousing, and what are the downstream consequences?


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.