Articles

Grant reviewer perceptions of the quality, effectiveness, and influence of panel discussion

Funding agencies have long used panel discussion in the peer review of research grant proposals as a way to utilize a set of expertise and perspectives in making funding decisions. Little research has examined...

Authors: Stephen A. Gallo, Karen B. Schmaling, Lisa A. Thompson and Scott R. Glisson

The limitations to our understanding of peer review

Peer review is embedded in the core of our knowledge generation systems, perceived as a method for establishing quality or scholarly legitimacy for research, while also often distributing academic prestige and...

Authors: Jonathan P. Tennant and Tony Ross-Hellauer

Proceedings from the V Brazilian Meeting on Research Integrity, Science and Publication Ethics (V BRISPE)

Authors:

Reproducible and transparent research practices in published neurology research

The objective of this study was to evaluate the nature and extent of reproducible and transparent research practices in neurology publications.

Authors: Shelby Rauh, Trevor Torgerson, Austin L. Johnson, Jonathan Pollard, Daniel Tritz and Matt Vassar

The acceptability of using a lottery to allocate research funding: a survey of applicants

The Health Research Council of New Zealand is the first major government funding agency to use a lottery to allocate research funding for their Explorer Grant scheme. This is a somewhat controversial approach ...

Authors: Mengyao Liu, Vernon Choy, Philip Clarke, Adrian Barnett, Tony Blakely and Lucy Pomeroy

The role of geographic bias in knowledge diffusion: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

Descriptive studies examining publication rates and citation counts demonstrate a geographic skew toward high-income countries (HIC), and research from low- or middle-income countries (LMICs) is generally unde...

Authors: Mark Skopec, Hamdi Issa, Julie Reed and Matthew Harris

Impact of US industry payment disclosure laws on payments to surgeons: a natural experiment

To compare changes in the number and amount of payments received by orthopedic and non-orthopedic surgeons from industry between 2014 and 2017.

Authors: Taeho Greg Rhee, Tijana Stanic and Joseph S. Ross

Spin in the reporting, interpretation, and extrapolation of adverse effects of orthodontic interventions: protocol for a cross-sectional study of systematic reviews

Titles and abstracts are the most read sections of biomedical papers. It is therefore important that abstracts transparently report both the beneficial and adverse effects of health care interventions and do n...

Authors: Pauline A. J. Steegmans, Nicola Di Girolamo and Reint A. Meursinge Reynders

Systematic overview of Freedom of Information Act requests to the Department of Health and Human Services from 2008 to 2017

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) provides access to unreleased government records that can be used to enhance the transparency and integrity of biomedical research. We characterized FOIA requests to Depar...

Authors: Alexander C. Egilman, Joshua D. Wallach, Christopher J. Morten, Peter Lurie and Joseph S. Ross

Researchers’ perceptions of research misbehaviours: a mixed methods study among academic researchers in Amsterdam

There is increasing evidence that research misbehaviour is common, especially the minor forms. Previous studies on research misbehaviour primarily focused on biomedical and social sciences, and evidence from n...

Authors: Tamarinde L. Haven, Joeri K. Tijdink, H. Roeline Pasman, Guy Widdershoven, Gerben ter Riet and Lex M. Bouter

Testing an active intervention to deter researchers’ use of questionable research practices

In this study, we tested a simple, active “ethical consistency” intervention aimed at reducing researchers’ endorsement of questionable research practices (QRPs).

Authors: S. V. Bruton, M. Brown, D. F. Sacco and R. Didlake

Librarians as methodological peer reviewers for systematic reviews: results of an online survey

Developing a comprehensive, reproducible literature search is the basis for a high-quality systematic review (SR). Librarians and information professionals, as expert searchers, can improve the quality of syst...

Authors: Holly K. Grossetta Nardini, Janene Batten, Melissa C. Funaro, Rolando Garcia-Milian, Kate Nyhan, Judy M. Spak, Lei Wang and Janis G. Glover

Evaluating ethics oversight during assessment of research integrity

We provide additional information relevant to our previous publication on the quality of reports of investigations of research integrity by academic institutions. Despite concerns being raised about ethical ov...

Authors: Andrew Grey, Mark Bolland and Alison Avenell

Development of research integrity in France is on the rise: the introduction of research integrity officers was a progress

Implementing responsible conduct of research and monitoring bad practices requires time and tact. In France, it was in 2015 that the wishes of those in charge of research proposed the appointment of research i...

Authors: Hervé Maisonneuve

A guide to applying the Good Publication Practice 3 guidelines in the Asia-Pacific region

Numerous recommendations and guidelines aim to improve the quality, timeliness and transparency of medical publications. However, these guidelines use ambiguous language that can be challenging to interpret, p...

Authors: Blair R. Hesp, Katsuhisa Arai, Magdalene Y. S. Chu, Stefanie Chuah, Jose Miguel B. Curameng, Sandeep Kamat, Zhigang Ma, Andrew Sakko and Hazel Fernandez

Impact of peer review on discussion of study limitations and strength of claims in randomized trial reports: a before and after study

In their research reports, scientists are expected to discuss limitations that their studies have. Previous research showed that often, such discussion is absent. Also, many journals emphasize the importance o...

Authors: Kerem Keserlioglu, Halil Kilicoglu and Gerben ter Riet

A 10-year follow up of publishing ethics in China: what is new and what is unchanged

Organ donation and transplantation in China are ethically complex due to questionable informed consent and the use of prisoners as donors. Publishing works from China can be problematic. The objective of this ...

Authors: Katrina A. Bramstedt and Jun Xu

Value pluralism in research integrity

Both scientists and society at large have rightfully become increasingly concerned about research integrity in recent decades. In response, codes of conduct for research have been developed and elaborated. We ...

Authors: Rik Peels, Jeroen de Ridder, Tamarinde Haven and Lex Bouter

Critical review of the TransCelerate Template for clinical study reports (CSRs) and publication of Version 2 of the CORE Reference (Clarity and Openness in Reporting: E3-based) Terminology Table

CORE (Clarity and Openness in Reporting: E3-based) Reference (released May 2016 by the European Medical Writers Association [EMWA] and the American Medical Writers Association [AMWA]) is a complete and authoritat...

Authors: Samina Hamilton, Aaron B. Bernstein, Graham Blakey, Vivien Fagan, Tracy Farrow, Debbie Jordan, Walther Seiler and Art Gertel

Publication and non-publication of clinical trials in PTSD: an overview

Although a large number of clinical trials on interventions demonstrating efficacy (or lack thereof) are conducted annually, much of this evidence is not accessible to scientists and clinicians.

Authors: Sharain Suliman, Leigh van den Heuvel, Alexandra Suryapranata, Jonathan I. Bisson and Soraya Seedat

Professional medical writing support and the quality, ethics and timeliness of clinical trial reporting: a systematic review

Many authors choose to work with professional medical writers when reporting the results of clinical trials. We conducted a systematic review to examine the relationship between professional medical writing su...

Authors: Obaro Evuarherhe, William Gattrell, Richard White and Christopher C. Winchester

Correction to: ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research Integrity

.

Authors: Lex M. Bouter, Joeri Tijdink, Nils Axelsen, Brian C. Martinson and Gerben ter Riet

A randomised controlled trial of an Intervention to Improve Compliance with the ARRIVE guidelines (IICARus)

The ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) guidelines are widely endorsed but compliance is limited. We sought to determine whether journal-requested completion of an ARRIVE checklist impro...

Authors: Kaitlyn Hair, Malcolm R. Macleod and Emily S. Sena

Good Practice for Conference Abstracts and Presentations: GPCAP

Research that has been sponsored by pharmaceutical, medical device and biotechnology companies is often presented at scientific and medical conferences. However, practices vary between organizations and it can...

Authors: Cate Foster, Elizabeth Wager, Jackie Marchington, Mina Patel, Steve Banner, Nina C. Kennard, Antonia Panayi and Rianne Stacey

The advantages of peer review over arbitration for resolving authorship disputes

A recent commentary argued for arbitration to resolve authorship disputes within academic research settings explaining that current mechanisms to resolve conflicts result in unclear outcomes and institutional ...

Authors: Zubin Master and Evelyn Tenenbaum

Measuring the data gap: inclusion of sex and gender reporting in diabetes research

Important sex and gender differences have been found in research on diabetes complications and treatment. Reporting on whether and how sex and gender impact research findings is crucial for developing tailored...

Authors: Suzanne Day, Wei Wu, Robin Mason and Paula A. Rochon

Policy driven changes in animal research practices: mapping researchers’ attitudes towards animal-free innovations using the Netherlands as an example

Reducing the number of animals used in experiments has become a priority for the governments of many countries. For these reductions to occur, animal-free alternatives must be made more available and, cruciall...

Authors: S. Bressers, H. van den Elzen, C. Gräwe, D. van den Oetelaar, P. H. A. Postma and S. K. Schoustra

Personally perceived publication pressure: revising the Publication Pressure Questionnaire (PPQ) by using work stress models

The emphasis on impact factors and the quantity of publications intensifies competition between researchers. This competition was traditionally considered an incentive to produce high-quality work, but there a...

Authors: Tamarinde L. Haven, Marije Esther Evalien de Goede, Joeri K. Tijdink and Frans Jeroen Oort

Selective citation in scientific literature on the human health effects of bisphenol A

Bisphenol A is highly debated and studied in relation to a variety of health outcomes. This large variation in the literature makes BPA a topic that is prone to selective use of literature, in order to underpi...

Authors: M. J. E. Urlings, B. Duyx, G. M. H. Swaen, L. M. Bouter and M. P. Zeegers

SANRA—a scale for the quality assessment of narrative review articles

Narrative reviews are the commonest type of articles in the medical literature. However, unlike systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials (RCT) articles, for which formal instruments exist to evaluat...

Authors: Christopher Baethge, Sandra Goldbeck-Wood and Stephan Mertens

Guidelines for open peer review implementation

Open peer review (OPR) is moving into the mainstream, but it is often poorly understood and surveys of researcher attitudes show important barriers to implementation. As more journals move to implement and exp...

Authors: Tony Ross-Hellauer and Edit Görögh

Quality of reports of investigations of research integrity by academic institutions

Academic institutions play important roles in protecting and preserving research integrity. Concerns have been expressed about the objectivity, adequacy and transparency of institutional investigations of pote...

Authors: Andrew Grey, Mark Bolland, Greg Gamble and Alison Avenell

Reporting in the abstracts presented at the 5th AfriNEAD (African Network for Evidence-to-Action in Disability) Conference in Ghana

The abstracts of a conference are important for informing the participants about the results that are communicated. However, there is poor reporting in conference abstracts in disability research. This paper a...

Authors: Eric Badu, Paul Okyere, Diane Bell, Naomi Gyamfi, Maxwell Peprah Opoku, Peter Agyei-Baffour and Anthony Kwaku Edusei

Replicability and replication in the humanities

A large number of scientists and several news platforms have, over the last few years, been speaking of a replication crisis in various academic disciplines, especially the biomedical and social sciences. This...

Authors: Rik Peels

RePAIR consensus guidelines: Responsibilities of Publishers, Agencies, Institutions, and Researchers in protecting the integrity of the research record

The progression of research and scholarly inquiry does not occur in isolation and is wholly dependent on accurate reporting of methods and results, and successful replication of prior work. Without mechanisms ...

Authors:

Commentary: a broader perspective on the RePAIR consensus guidelines (Responsibilities of Publishers, Agencies, Institutions, and Researchers in protecting the integrity of the research record)

Authors: Zoë H. Hammatt

New COPE guidelines on publication process manipulation: why they matter

Manipulation of the publication process is a relatively new form of misconduct affecting the publishing industry. This editorial describes what it is, why it is difficult for individual journal editors and pub...

Authors: Jigisha Patel

Resolving authorship disputes by mediation and arbitration

Disputes over authorship are increasing. This paper examines the options that researchers have in resolving authorship disputes. Discussions about authorship disputes often address how to prevent disputes but ...

Authors: Zen Faulkes

Correction to: The changing forms and expectations of peer review

Following publication of this article [1] it was brought to our attention that we omitted to provide credit for Table 1. While the content of the table and the systematization of blinding in review have been r...

Authors: S. P. J. M. (Serge) Horbach and W. (Willem) Halffman

Protocol for the development of a CONSORT extension for RCTs using cohorts and routinely collected health data

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are often complex and expensive to perform. Less than one third achieve planned recruitment targets, follow-up can be labor-intensive, and many have limited real-world gener...

Authors: Linda Kwakkenbos, Edmund Juszczak, Lars G Hemkens, Margaret Sampson, Ole Fröbert, Clare Relton, Chris Gale, Merrick Zwarenstein, Sinéad M Langan, David Moher, Isabelle Boutron, Philippe Ravaud, Marion K Campbell, Kimberly A Mc Cord, Tjeerd P van Staa, Lehana Thabane…

Students’ and supervisors’ knowledge and attitudes regarding plagiarism and referencing

Referencing is an integral part of scientific writing and professional research conduct that requires appropriate acknowledgement of others’ work and avoidance of plagiarism. University students should underst...

Authors: Johanna F Lindahl and Delia Grace

Reported use of reporting guidelines among JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute authors, editorial outcomes, and reviewer ratings related to adherence to guidelines and clarity of presentation

Associations were examined between author-reported uses of reporting guidelines to prepare JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute (JNCI) submissions, editorial decisions, and reviewer ratings for adherenc...

Authors: Jeannine Botos

The changing forms and expectations of peer review

The quality and integrity of the scientific literature have recently become the subject of heated debate. Due to an apparent increase in cases of scientific fraud and irreproducible research, some have claimed...

Authors: S. P. J. M. ( Serge) Horbach and W. ( Willem) Halffman

Beyond sex and gender difference in funding and reporting of health research

Understanding sex and gender in health research can improve the quality of scholarship and enhance health outcomes. Funding agencies and academic journals are two key gatekeepers of knowledge production and di...

Authors: Olena Hankivsky, Kristen W. Springer and Gemma Hunting

Uptake and outcome of manuscripts in Nature journals by review model and author characteristics

Double-blind peer review has been proposed as a possible solution to avoid implicit referee bias in academic publishing. The aims of this study are to analyse the demographics of corresponding authors choosing...

Authors: Barbara McGillivray and Elisa De Ranieri

Reviewing the review: a qualitative assessment of the peer review process in surgical journals

Despite rapid growth of the scientific literature, no consensus guidelines have emerged to define the optimal criteria for editors to grade submitted manuscripts. The purpose of this project was to assess the ...

Authors: Catherine H. Davis, Barbara L. Bass, Kevin E. Behrns, Keith D. Lillemoe, O. James Garden, Mark S. Roh, Jeffrey E. Lee, Charles M. Balch and Thomas A. Aloia

Research Integrity and Peer Review—past highlights and future directions

In May 2016, we launched Research Integrity and Peer Review, an international, open access journal with fully open peer review (reviewers are identified on their reports and named reports are published alongside ...

Authors: Stephanie L. Boughton, Maria K. Kowalczuk, Joerg J. Meerpohl, Elizabeth Wager and Elizabeth C. Moylan

Designing integrated research integrity training: authorship, publication, and peer review

This paper describes the experience of an academic institution, the Queensland University of Technology (QUT), developing training courses about research integrity practices in authorship, publication, and Jou...

Authors: Mark Hooper, Virginia Barbour, Anne Walsh, Stephanie Bradbury and Jane Jacobs

Biomedical journal speed and efficiency: a cross-sectional pilot survey of author experiences

Although the peer review process is believed to ensure scientific rigor, enhance research quality, and improve manuscript clarity, many investigators are concerned that the process is too slow, too expensive, ...

Authors: Joshua D. Wallach, Alexander C. Egilman, Anand D. Gopal, Nishwant Swami, Harlan M. Krumholz and Joseph S. Ross

Simple decision-tree tool to facilitate author identification of reporting guidelines during submission: a before–after study

There is evidence that direct journal endorsement of reporting guidelines can lead to important improvements in the quality and reliability of the published research. However, over the last 20 years, there has...

Authors: Daniel R. Shanahan, Ines Lopes de Sousa and Diana M. Marshall