Skip to main content

Articles

Page 2 of 3

  1. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2019 4:16
    Content type: Review Published on:

  2. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2019 4:15
    Content type: Research Published on:

  3. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2019 4:14
    Content type: Review Published on:

  5. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2019 4:12
    Content type: Research Published on:

  6. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2019 4:11
    Content type: Research Published on:

  7. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2019 4:10
    Content type: Commentary Published on:

    The original article was published in Research Integrity and Peer Review 2018 3:12

  9. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2019 4:8
    Content type: Research Published on:

  10. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2019 4:7
    Content type: Methodology Published on:

  11. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2019 4:6
    Content type: Research Published on:

  13. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2019 4:4
    Content type: Commentary Published on:

  15. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2019 4:1
    Content type: Review Published on:

  16. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2019 4:2
    Content type: Commentary Published on:

  17. 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:
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2018 3:15
    Content type: Commentary Published on:

    The Commentary to this article has been published in Research Integrity and Peer Review 2018 3:14

  20. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2018 3:12
    Content type: Commentary Published on:

    The Commentary to this article has been published in Research Integrity and Peer Review 2019 4:10

  21. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2018 3:11
    Content type: Correction Published on:

    The original article was published in Research Integrity and Peer Review 2018 3:8

  22. 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…
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2018 3:9
    Content type: Study protocol Published on:

  24. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2018 3:7
    Content type: Research Published on:

  25. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2018 3:8
    Content type: Review Published on:

    The Correction to this article has been published in Research Integrity and Peer Review 2018 3:11

  28. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2018 3:4
    Content type: Research Published on:

  29. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2018 3:3
    Content type: Editorial Published on:

  30. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2018 3:2
    Content type: Commentary Published on:

  31. 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
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2018 3:1
    Content type: Research Published on:

  32. 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
    Content type: Research Published on:

  33. In Australia, the peer review process for competitive funding is usually conducted by a peer review group in conjunction with prior assessment from external assessors. This process is quite mysterious to those...

    Authors: John Coveney, Danielle L Herbert, Kathy Hill, Karen E Mow, Nicholas Graves and Adrian Barnett
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2:19
    Content type: Research Published on:

  34. Deciphering the amount of work provided by different co-authors of a scientific paper has been a recurrent problem in science. Despite the myriad of metrics available, the scientific community still largely re...

    Authors: Stéphane Boyer, Takayoshi Ikeda, Marie-Caroline Lefort, Jagoba Malumbres-Olarte and Jason M. Schmidt
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2:18
    Content type: Methodology Published on:

  35. 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
    Content type: Research Published on:

  36. Winning funding for health and medical research usually involves a lengthy application process. With success rates under 20%, much of the time spent by 80% of applicants could have been better used on actual r...

    Authors: Adrian G. Barnett, Philip Clarke, Cedryck Vaquette and Nicholas Graves
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2:16
    Content type: Research Published on:

  37. 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
    Content type: Research Published on:

  38. Research Ethics Boards, or Institutional Review Boards, protect the safety and welfare of human research participants. These bodies are responsible for providing an independent evaluation of proposed research ...

    Authors: Stacey A. Page and Jeffrey Nyeboer
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2:14
    Content type: Commentary Published on:

  40. Trial registration helps minimize publication and reporting bias. In leading medical journals, 96% of published trials are registered. The aim of this study was to determine the proportion of randomized contro...

    Authors: Richard Gray, Ashish Badnapurkar, Eman Hassanein, Donna Thomas, Laileah Barguir, Charley Baker, Martin Jones, Daniel Bressington, Ellie Brown and Annie Topping
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2:8
    Content type: Research Published on:

  41. New metrics have been developed to assess the impact of research and provide an indication of online media attention and data dissemination. We aimed to describe online media attention of articles evaluating c...

    Authors: Romana Haneef, Philippe Ravaud, Gabriel Baron, Lina Ghosn and Isabelle Boutron
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2:9
    Content type: Methodology Published on:

  42. The aim of this survey was to determine the level of awareness and understanding of peer review and peer review models amongst junior hospital doctors and whether this influences clinical decision-making.

    Authors: Jigisha Patel, Mary Pierce, Stephanie L. Boughton and Stephanie E. Baldeweg
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2:11
    Content type: Research Published on:

  43. Authors: Sonia Vasconcelos, Edson Watanabe, L. P. Garcia, E. Duarte, M. C. Cassimiro, M. M. P. Diós-Borges, A. M. M. Soares, C. H. Debenedito Silva, A. A. P. Santa Rosa, G. A. Fófano, H. S. Pinheiro, A. M. Gollner, C. C. Santos, S. M. R. Vasconcelos, D. C. Machado, P. V. S. Souza…
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2(Suppl 1):12
    Content type: Meeting Abstracts Published on:

    This article is part of a Supplement: Volume 2 Supplement 1

  44. There is increasing need for peer reviewers as the scientific literature grows. Formal education in biostatistics and research methodology during residency training is lacking. In this pilot study, we addresse...

    Authors: Victoria S. S. Wong, Roy E. Strowd III, Rebeca Aragón-García, Yeseon Park Moon, Blair Ford, Sheryl R. Haut, Joseph S. Kass, Zachary N. London, MaryAnn Mays, Tracey A. Milligan, Raymond S. Price, Patrick S. Reynolds, Linda M. Selwa, David C. Spencer and Mitchell S. V. Elkind
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2:6
    Content type: Research Published on:

  47. The annual number of retracted publications in the scientific literature is rapidly increasing. The objective of this study was to determine the frequency and reason for retraction of cancer publications and t...

    Authors: Anthony Bozzo, Kamal Bali, Nathan Evaniew and Michelle Ghert
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2:5
    Content type: Research Published on:

  48. 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
    Content type: Review Published on:

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

  49. It is commonly reported by editors that it has become harder to recruit reviewers for peer review and that this is because individuals are being asked to review too often and are experiencing reviewer fatigue....

    Authors: Charles W. Fox, Arianne Y. K. Albert and Timothy H. Vines
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2017 2:3
    Content type: Commentary Published on:

    The original article was published in Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:14

Submit manuscript

Follow

  • ISSN: 2058-8615 (electronic)

Research Integrity and Peer Review

ISSN: 2058-8615

Contact us