Skip to content

Advertisement

Research Integrity and Peer Review

Reporting

Section edited by Joerg Meerpohl

This Section considers manuscripts investigating the issues relating to research reporting. Manuscripts evaluating interventions to improve the completeness, accuracy and usability of research reports, development, evaluation and implementation of reporting guidelines, prevention of publication bias and selective reporting, and improvement of readability are particularly encouraged. The Section also welcomes studies or constructive discussions on alternatives to academic publishing (such as reporting in research registries) and other novel approaches aimed at increasing the availability, value and reliability of published research.

  1. Content type: Research

    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

    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2:20

    Published on:

  2. Content type: Research

    Knowledge development depends on an unbiased representation of the available evidence. Selective citation may distort this representation. Recently, some controversy emerged regarding the possible impact of sw...

    Authors: Bram Duyx, Miriam J. E. Urlings, Gerard M. H. Swaen, Lex M. Bouter and Maurice P. Zeegers

    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2:17

    Published on:

  3. Content type: Research

    Accurate reporting on sex and gender in health research is integral to ensuring that health interventions are safe and effective. In Canada and internationally, governments, research organizations, journal edi...

    Authors: V. Welch, M. Doull, M. Yoganathan, J. Jull, M. Boscoe, S. E. Coen, Z. Marshall, J. Pardo Pardo, A. Pederson, J. Petkovic, L. Puil, L. Quinlan, B. Shea, T. Rader, V. Runnels and S. Tudiver

    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2:15

    Published on:

  4. Content type: Review

    The foundation of health and medical research is data. Data sharing facilitates the progress of research and strengthens science. Data sharing in research is widely discussed in the literature; however, there ...

    Authors: Anisa Rowhani-Farid, Michelle Allen and Adrian G. Barnett

    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2:4

    Published on:

    The Erratum to this article has been published in Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2:7

  5. Content type: Research

    Many journals prohibit the use of declarative titles that state study findings, yet a few journals encourage or even require them. We compared the effects of a declarative versus a descriptive title on readers...

    Authors: Elizabeth Wager, Douglas G. Altman, Iveta Simera and Tudor P. Toma

    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:11

    Published on:

  6. Content type: Research

    To limit selective and incomplete publication of the results of clinical trials, registries including ClinicalTrials.gov were introduced. The ClinicalTrials.gov registry added a results database in 2008 to ena...

    Authors: Innocent Gerald Asiimwe and Dickson Rumona

    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:10

    Published on:

  7. Content type: Methodology

    Sharing of experimental clinical research data usually happens between individuals or research groups rather than via public repositories, in part due to the need to protect research participant privacy. This ...

    Authors: Iain Hrynaszkiewicz, Varsha Khodiyar, Andrew L. Hufton and Susanna-Assunta Sansone

    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:6

    Published on:

  8. Content type: Methodology

    Although the number of reporting guidelines has grown rapidly, few have gone through an updating process. The STARD statement (Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy), published in 2003 to help improve th...

    Authors: Daniël A. Korevaar, Jérémie F. Cohen, Johannes B. Reitsma, David E. Bruns, Constantine A. Gatsonis, Paul P. Glasziou, Les Irwig, David Moher, Henrica C. W. de Vet, Douglas G. Altman, Lotty Hooft and Patrick M. M. Bossuyt

    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:7

    Published on:

  9. Content type: Review

    Sex and gender differences are often overlooked in research design, study implementation and scientific reporting, as well as in general science communication. This oversight limits the generalizability of res...

    Authors: Shirin Heidari, Thomas F. Babor, Paola De Castro, Sera Tort and Mirjam Curno

    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:2

    Published on:

    The Erratum to this article has been published in Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:8

  10. Content type: Methodology

    Interventional clinical studies conducted in the regulated drug research environment are reported using International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) regulatory guidance documents: ICH E3 on the structure and ...

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

    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:4

    Published on:

Advertisement

Research Integrity and Peer Review

ISSN: 2058-8615

Contact us