Scientific Communication and Education

Investing in Open Science: Key Considerations for Funders

1. Dana E. Cobb-Lewis
2. Devin Synder
3. Sonya Dumanis
4. Robert Thibault
5. Barbara Marebwa
6. Elisia Clark
7. Lara St. Clair
8. Leslie Kirsch
9. Michelle Durborow
10. Ekemini Riley

Reviewed by PREreview

Estimating the replicability of Brazilian biomedical science

1. The Brazilian Reproducibility Initiative

• Curated by eLife

  eLife Assessment

  This important study assessed the replicability of a selection of lab-based biomedical experiments in papers published by authors based in Brazil. The study adds a unique perspective to the literature on replication, and provides rich data on the approach taken, the outcomes, and the challenges involved in conducting large-scale crowd-sourced research. The evidence supporting the claims is convincing, but there is scope for clarifying the presentation of the results and extending the discussion section.

Reviewed by eLife

Discovery Stack Pilot Demonstrates the Feasibility and Outcomes of a Scientist-Designed Peer-Review Model That Separates Quality and Impact

1. Maureen A. McGargill
2. Beiyun C. Liu
3. Michael S. Kuhns
4. Daniel Mucida
5. Isabella Rauch
6. Lauren B. Rodda
7. Meghan A. Koch
8. Hugo Gonzalez
9. Ken Cadwell
10. Tanya S. Freedman
11. Tiffany C. Scharschmidt
12. Richard Sever
13. Jose Ordovas-Montanes
14. Andrew Oberst
15. Brooke Runnette
16. Matthew F. Krummel

Reviewed by PREreview

Writing for identity? Exploring the motivations of pre-college students to participate in science publication

1. Sarah C. Fankhauser
2. Tanya Bhagatwala

Reviewed by PREreview

The Research Mind: A Multi-Dimensional Framework for Evaluating Research Quality, Productivity, and Integrity by Mitigating citation bias

1. Sanjay Rathee
2. Chanchal Chaudhary

Reviewed by PREreview

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

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