Scientific Communication and Education

A retrospective analysis of 400 publications reveals patterns of irreproducibility across an entire life sciences research field

1. Joseph Lemaitre
2. Désirée Popelka
3. Blandine Ribotta
4. Hannah Westlake
5. Sveta Chakrabarti
6. Li Xiaoxue
7. Mark A. Hanson
8. Haobo Jiang
9. Francesca Di Cara
10. Estee Kurant
11. Fabrice David
12. Bruno Lemaitre

• Curated by eLife

  eLife Assessment

  This important study presents an impressive large-scale effort to assess the reproducibility of published findings in the field of Drosophila immunity. The authors analyse 400 papers published between 1959 and 2011, and assess how many of the claims in these papers have been tested in subsequent publications. In a companion article they report the results of experiments to test a subset of the claims that, according to the literature, have not been tested. The present article also explores if various factors related to authors, institutions and journals influence reproducibility in this field. The evidence supporting the claims is solid, but there is considerable scope for strengthening and extending the analysis. The limitations inherent to evaluating reproducibility based on the published literature should also be acknowledged.

Reviewed by eLife

Addressing cultural and knowledge barriers to enable preclinical sex inclusive research

1. Brianna N Gaskill
2. Benjamin Phillips
3. Jonathan Ho
4. Holly Rafferty
5. Oladele Olajide Onada
6. Andrew Rooney
7. Amrita Ahluwalia
8. Natasha A Karp

• Curated by eLife

  eLife Assessment

  The authors quantified intentions and knowledge gaps in scientists' use of sex as a biological variable in their work, and used a workshop intervention to show that while willingness was high, pressure points centered on statistical knowledge and perceived additional monetary costs to research. These important findings demonstrate the difficulty in changing understanding: while interventions can improve knowledge and decrease perceived barriers, the impact was small. The evidence for the findings is solid.

Reviewed by eLife

The evolution of interdisciplinarity and internationalization in scientific journals

1. Huaxia Zhou
2. Luís A Nunes Amaral

• Curated by eLife

  eLife Assessment

  This important study uses data from OpenAlex on more than 50 million journal articles in over 50,000 research journals to examine the dynamics of interdisciplinarity and international collaboration in research journals. The data analytics used to quantify disciplinary and national diversity are convincing, and support the claims that journals have become more diverse in both aspects. The revisions made by the authors have addressed the small number of concerns the reviewers had about the original version.

Reviewed by eLife

Comparing the outputs of intramural and extramural grants funded by National Institutes of Health

1. Xiang Zheng
2. Qiyao Yang
3. Jai Potnuri
4. Chaoqun Ni
5. B Ian Hutchins

• Curated by eLife

  eLife Assessment

  This important study used five metrics to compare the cost-effectiveness of intramural and extramural research funded by the National Institutes of Health in the United States between 2009 and 2019. They found that each type of research had its own set of strengths: extramural research was more cost-effective in terms of publications, whereas intramural research was more cost-effective in terms of influencing clinical work. The evidence supporting these findings is mostly solid, but there are a number of questions about the methods and data - notably about indirect cost recovery and other non-NIH sources of funding - that need to be answered.

Reviewed by PREreview, eLife

Analysis of citation dynamics reveals that you do not receive enough recognition for your influential science

1. Salsabil Arabi
2. Chaoqun Ni
3. B. Ian Hutchins

Reviewed by PREreview

Gender differences in submission behavior exacerbate publication disparities in elite journals

1. Chaoqun Ni
2. Isabel Basson
3. Giovanna Badia
4. Nathalie Tufenkji
5. Cassidy R Sugimoto
6. Vincent Larivière

• Curated by eLife

  eLife Assessment

  This convincing study, which is based on a survey of researchers, finds that women are less likely than men to submit articles to elite journals. It also finds that there is no relation between gender and reported desk rejection. The study is an important contribution to work on gender bias in the scientific literature.

Reviewed by eLife

Human Attitudes Toward Insects and Spiders: Exploring the Paradoxes of Ecological Value and Discomfort

1. Divya Arora
2. Sunil Dutt Shukla

Reviewed by PREreview

Identifying gaps between scientific and local knowledge in climate change adaptation for northern European agriculture

1. Kristina Blennow
2. Georg Carlsson
3. Laura Joy Grenville-Briggs
4. Per Hansson
5. Asa Lankinen

Reviewed by preLights

“Spurring and Siloing: Identity Navigation in Scientific Writing Among Asian Student Researchers”

1. Devon Goss
2. Meena Balgopal
3. Shaila Sachdev
4. Grace Kim
5. LaTonia Taliaferro-Smith
6. Sarah C. Fankhauser

Reviewed by preLights

Gaming the Metrics? Bibliometric Anomalies and the Integrity Crisis in Global University Rankings

1. Lokman I. Meho

Reviewed by PREreview