Skip to main content

Articles

Page 1 of 3

  1. Despite the improvements in the completeness of reporting of randomized trial protocols after the publication of the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trial (SPIRIT) guidelines, many ...

    Authors: David Blanco, Márcio Vinícius Fagundes Donadio and Aïda Cadellans-Arróniz
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2024 9:6
  2. Equal, diverse, and inclusive teams lead to higher productivity, creativity, and greater problem-solving ability resulting in more impactful research. However, there is a gap between equality, diversity, and i...

    Authors: Oliver J. Fisher, Debra Fearnshaw, Nicholas J. Watson, Peter Green, Fiona Charnley, Duncan McFarlane and Sarah Sharples
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2024 9:5
  3. Peer review is essential to the advancement of knowledge. However, training on how to conduct peer review is limited, unorganized, and not well studied. Thus, we sought to determine if a structured mentored pe...

    Authors: Ariel Maia Lyons-Warren, Whitley W. Aamodt, Kathleen M. Pieper and Roy E. Strowd
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2024 9:3
  4. Journal editors have a large amount of power to advance open science in their respective fields by incentivising and mandating open policies and practices at their journals. The Data PASS Journal Editors Discu...

    Authors: Priya Silverstein, Colin Elman, Amanda Montoya, Barbara McGillivray, Charlotte R. Pennington, Chase H. Harrison, Crystal N. Steltenpohl, Jan Philipp Röer, Katherine S. Corker, Lisa M. Charron, Mahmoud Elsherif, Mario Malicki, Rachel Hayes-Harb, Sandra Grinschgl, Tess Neal, Thomas Rhys Evans…
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2024 9:2
  5. Objectives of this study were to analyze the impact of including librarians and information specialist as methodological peer-reviewers. We sought to determine if and how librarians’ comments differed from sub...

    Authors: Irina Ibragimova and Helen Fulbright
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2024 9:1
  6. Studies on academic integrity reveal high rates of plagiarism and cheating among students. We have developed an online teaching tool, Integrity Games (https://​integgame.​eu/​

    Authors: Aurélien Allard, Anna Catharina Vieira Armond, Mads Paludan Goddiksen, Mikkel Willum Johansen, Hillar Loor, Céline Schöpfer, Orsolya Varga and Christine Clavien
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2023 8:15
  7. There is a power imbalance between authors and reviewers in single-blind peer review. We explored how switching from single-blind to double-blind peer review affected 1) the willingness of experts to review, 2...

    Authors: Piitu Parmanne, Joonas Laajava, Noora Järvinen, Terttu Harju, Mauri Marttunen and Pertti Saloheimo
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2023 8:14
  8. Diversity among editorial boards and in the peer review process maximizes the likelihood that the dissemination of reported results is both relevant and respectful to readers and end users. Past studies have e...

    Authors: Anna Nuechterlein, Tanya Barretto, Alaa Yehia and Judy Illes
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2023 8:12
  9. Abstracts should provide a brief yet comprehensive reporting of all components of a manuscript. Inaccurate reporting may mislead readers and impact citation practices. It was our goal to investigate the report...

    Authors: Sherif Ahmed Kamel and Tamer A. El-Sobky
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2023 8:11
  10. The practice of clinical research is strictly regulated by law. During submission and review processes, compliance of such research with the laws enforced in the country where it was conducted is not always co...

    Authors: Fabrice Frank, Nans Florens, Gideon Meyerowitz-katz, Jérôme Barriere, Éric Billy, Véronique Saada, Alexander Samuel, Jacques Robert and Lonni Besançon
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2023 8:9
  11. In many grant review settings, proposals are selected for funding on the basis of summary statistics of review ratings. Challenges of this approach (including the presence of ties and unclear ordering of fundi...

    Authors: Stephen A. Gallo, Michael Pearce, Carole J. Lee and Elena A. Erosheva
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2023 8:10
  12. Research misconduct i.e. fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism is associated with individual, institutional, national, and global factors. Researchers' perceptions of weak or non-existent institutional gu...

    Authors: Edwin Were, Jepchirchir Kiplagat, Eunice Kaguiri, Rose Ayikukwei and Violet Naanyu
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2023 8:8
  13. To propose a checklist that can be used to assess trustworthiness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

    Authors: Ben W. Mol, Shimona Lai, Ayesha Rahim, Esmée M. Bordewijk, Rui Wang, Rik van Eekelen, Lyle C. Gurrin, Jim G. Thornton, Madelon van Wely and Wentao Li
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2023 8:6
  14. The emergence of systems based on large language models (LLMs) such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT has created a range of discussions in scholarly circles. Since LLMs generate grammatically correct and mostly relevant (y...

    Authors: Mohammad Hosseini and Serge P. J. M. Horbach
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2023 8:4

    The Publisher Correction to this article has been published in Research Integrity and Peer Review 2023 8:7

  15. Differential participation and success in grant applications may contribute to women’s lesser representation in the sciences. This study’s objective was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to addr...

    Authors: Karen B. Schmaling and Stephen A. Gallo
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2023 8:2
  16. There are a variety of costs associated with publication of scientific findings. The purpose of this work was to estimate the cost of peer review in scientific publishing per reviewer, per year and for the ent...

    Authors: Allana G. LeBlanc, Joel D. Barnes, Travis J. Saunders, Mark S. Tremblay and Jean-Philippe Chaput
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2023 8:3
  17. Retraction is a mechanism for alerting readers to unreliable material and other problems in the published scientific and scholarly record. Retracted publications generally remain visible and searchable, but t...

    Authors: Jodi Schneider, Nathan D. Woods and Randi Proescholdt
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2022 7:6
  18. There are growing bodies of evidence demonstrating the benefits of equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) on academic and organizational excellence. In turn, some editors have stated their desire to improve th...

    Authors: Omar Dewidar, Nour Elmestekawy and Vivian Welch
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2022 7:4
  19. Structured, systematic methods to formulate consensus recommendations, such as the Delphi process or nominal group technique, among others, provide the opportunity to harness the knowledge of experts to suppor...

    Authors: William T. Gattrell, Amrit Pali Hungin, Amy Price, Christopher C. Winchester, David Tovey, Ellen L. Hughes, Esther J. van Zuuren, Keith Goldman, Patricia Logullo, Robert Matheis and Niall Harrison
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2022 7:3
  20. Allocation of research funds relies on peer review to support funding decisions, and these processes can be susceptible to biases and inefficiencies. The aim of this work was to determine which past interventi...

    Authors: Alejandra Recio-Saucedo, Ksenia Crane, Katie Meadmore, Kathryn Fackrell, Hazel Church, Simon Fraser and Amanda Blatch-Jones
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2022 7:2
  21. The demand for peer reviewers is often perceived as disproportionate to the supply and availability of reviewers. Considering characteristics associated with peer review behaviour can allow for the development...

    Authors: Danielle B. Rice, Ba’ Pham, Justin Presseau, Andrea C. Tricco and David Moher
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2022 7:1

    The Correction to this article has been published in Research Integrity and Peer Review 2022 7:5

  22. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) is obligated to peer review and to post publicly “Final Research Reports” of all funded projects. PCORI peer review emphasizes adherence to PCORI’s Meth...

    Authors: Evan Mayo-Wilson, Meredith L. Phillips, Avonne E. Connor, Kelly J. Vander Ley, Kevin Naaman and Mark Helfand
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2021 6:16
  23. The current paper follows up on the results of an exploratory quantitative analysis that compared the publication and citation records of men and women researchers affiliated with the Faculty of Computing and ...

    Authors: Mohammad Hosseini and Shiva Sharifzad
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2021 6:15
  24. Open peer review practices are increasing in medicine and life sciences, but in social sciences and humanities (SSH) they are still rare. We aimed to map out how editors of respected SSH journals perceive open...

    Authors: Veli-Matti Karhulahti and Hans-Joachim Backe
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2021 6:13
  25. Vast sums are distributed based on grant peer review, but studies show that interrater reliability is often low. In this study, we tested the effect of receiving two short individual feedback reports compared ...

    Authors: Jan-Ole Hesselberg, Knut Inge Fostervold, Pål Ulleberg and Ida Svege
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2021 6:12
  26. Australian health and medical research funders support substantial research efforts, and incentives within grant funding schemes influence researcher behaviour. We aimed to determine to what extent Australian ...

    Authors: Joanna Diong, Cynthia M. Kroeger, Katherine J. Reynolds, Adrian Barnett and Lisa A. Bero
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2021 6:11
  27. The Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines describe modular standards that journals can adopt to promote open science. The TOP Factor is a metric to describe the extent to which journals have ado...

    Authors: Evan Mayo-Wilson, Sean Grant, Lauren Supplee, Sina Kianersi, Afsah Amin, Alex DeHaven and David Mellor
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2021 6:9
  28. Healthcare professionals are exposed to advertisements for prescription drugs in medical journals. Such advertisements may increase prescriptions of new drugs at the expense of older treatments even when they ...

    Authors: Kim Boesen, Anders Lykkemark Simonsen, Karsten Juhl Jørgensen and Peter C. Gøtzsche
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2021 6:8

    The Correction to this article has been published in Research Integrity and Peer Review 2021 6:10

  29. Concerns about research misbehavior in academic science have sparked interest in the factors that may explain research misbehavior. Often three clusters of factors are distinguished: individual factors, climat...

    Authors: Tamarinde Haven, Joeri Tijdink, Brian Martinson, Lex Bouter and Frans Oort
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2021 6:7
  30. A proposal to encourage the preregistration of research on research integrity was developed and adopted as the Amsterdam Agenda at the 5th World Conference on Research Integrity (Amsterdam, 2017). This paper r...

    Authors: Klaas Sijtsma, Wilco H. M. Emons, Nicholas H. Steneck and Lex M. Bouter
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2021 6:5
  31. Our recent paper (https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s41073-020-00096-x) reported that 43% of reviewer comment sets (n=1491) shared with authors contained at least one unprof...

    Authors: Travis G. Gerwing, Alyssa M. Allen Gerwing, Chi-Yeung Choi, Stephanie Avery-Gomm, Jeff C. Clements and Joshua A. Rash
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2021 6:4
  32. Research misconduct and questionable research practices have been the subject of increasing attention in the past few years. But despite the rich body of research available, few empirical works also include th...

    Authors: Noémie Aubert Bonn and Wim Pinxten
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2021 6:3
  33. Success shapes the lives and careers of scientists. But success in science is difficult to define, let alone to translate in indicators that can be used for assessment. In the past few years, several groups ex...

    Authors: Noémie Aubert Bonn and Wim Pinxten
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2021 6:1
  34. Research on research integrity has tended to focus on frequency of research misconduct and factors that might induce someone to commit research misconduct. A definitive answer to the first question has been el...

    Authors: Michael Kalichman
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2020 5:17
  35. Preprint usage is growing rapidly in the life sciences; however, questions remain on the relative quality of preprints when compared to published articles. An objective dimension of quality that is readily mea...

    Authors: Clarissa F. D. Carneiro, Victor G. S. Queiroz, Thiago C. Moulin, Carlos A. M. Carvalho, Clarissa B. Haas, Danielle Rayêe, David E. Henshall, Evandro A. De-Souza, Felippe E. Amorim, Flávia Z. Boos, Gerson D. Guercio, Igor R. Costa, Karina L. Hajdu, Lieve van Egmond, Martin Modrák, Pedro B. Tan…
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2020 5:16
  36. Inaccurate citations are erroneous quotations or instances of paraphrasing of previously published material that mislead readers about the claims of the cited source. They are often unaddressed due to underrep...

    Authors: Mohammad Hosseini, Martin Paul Eve, Bert Gordijn and Cameron Neylon
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2020 5:13
  37. The rigor and integrity of the published research in nutrition studies has come into serious question in recent years. Concerns focus on the use of flexible data analysis practices and selective reporting and ...

    Authors: Dennis M. Gorman and Alva O. Ferdinand
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2020 5:12
  38. Triggered by a series of controversies and diversifying expectations of editorial practices, several innovative peer review procedures and supporting technologies have been proposed. However, adoption of these...

    Authors: Serge P. J. M. Horbach and Willem Halffman
    Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2020 5:11