Increasing the evidence base in journalology: Creating an international best practice journal research network

BMC Medicine

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2016, Pages

  Moher, David ^a,b   Ravaud, Philippe ^c  

^a OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^c PARIS DESCARTES UNIVERSITY   (France)

Author keywords

Best practice; Editors; Evidence; Funders; Journalology; Publishers; Quality of reporting; Research

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL MEDICINE; EDITOR; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE CENTER; HUMAN; PEER REVIEW; PUBLICATION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PUBLISHING; STANDARDS;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; HUMANS; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; PUBLISHING;

EID: 84990866100     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17417015     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-016-0707-2     Document Type: Editorial

References (22)

1. Yordanov Y, Dechartres A, Porcher R, et al. Avoidable waste of research related to inadequate methods in clinical trials. BMJ. 2015;350:h809.
2. Open Science Collaboration. PSYCHOLOGY. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science. 2015;349(6251):aac4716.
3. Macleod MR, Lawson MA, Kyriakopoulou A, et al. Risk of bias in reports of in vivo research: a focus for improvement. PLoS Biology. 2015;13(10):e1002273.
4. Dwan K, Altman DG, Clarke M, et al. Evidence for the selective reporting of analyses and discrepancies in clinical trials: a systematic review of cohort studies of clinical trials. PLoS Medicine. 2014;11(6):e1001666.
5. Page MJ, Shamseer L, Altman DG, et al. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews of biomedical research: a cross-sectional study. PLoS Medicine. 2016;13(5):e1002028.
6. Hirst A, Altman DG. Are peer reviewers encouraged to use reporting guidelines? A survey of 116 health research journals. PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e35621.
7. Cobo E, Cortes J, Ribera JM, et al. Effect of using reporting guidelines during peer review on quality of final manuscripts submitted to a biomedical journal: masked randomised trial. BMJ. 2011;343:d6783.
8. Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman DG, et al. Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;11:MR000030.
9. Galipeau J, Moher D, Campbell C, et al. A systematic review highlights a knowledge gap regarding the effectiveness of health-related training programs in journalology. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2015;68(3):257-65.
10. Ravaud P. Web-based Tool to Improve Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials (WebCONSORT). 2016. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01891448. Accessed 9 June 2016.
11. Garfield E, Stephen P. Lock on "Journalology". Curr Comment. 1990;3:19-24.
12. Rennie D, Flanagin A, Godlee F, et al. Eighth international congress on peer review in biomedical publication. BMJ. 2015;350:h2411.
13. van Rooyen S. A critical examination of the peer review process. Learned Publish. 1998;11(3):185-91.
14. Malicki M, von Elm E, Marusic A. Study design, publication outcome, and funding of research presented at international congresses on peer review and biomedical publication. JAMA. 2014;311(10):1065-7.
15. Kousta S, Ferguson C, Ganley E. Meta-research: broadening the scope of PLOS Biology. PLoS Biology. 2016;14(1):e1002334.
16. Lannon CM, Peterson LE. Pediatric collaborative networks for quality improvement and research. Academic Pediatrics. 2013;13(6 Suppl):S69-74.
17. Bruce R, Chauvin A, Trinquart L, Ravaud P, Boutron I. Impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review of biomedical journals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Medicine. 2016;14:85.
18. Williamson PR, Altman DG, Blazeby JM, et al. Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider. Trials. 2012;13:132.
19. Kleinert S, Horton R. How should medical science change? Lancet. 2014;383(9913):197-8.
20. Taichman DB, Backus J, Baethge C, et al. Sharing clinical trial data: a proposal from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. PLoS Medicine. 2016;13(1):e1001950.
21. The European Association of Science Editors (EASE). EASE statement on data sharing 4 April 2016. http://www.ease.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/data-sharing-statement.pdf. Accessed 9 June 2016.
22. Owen R, Macnaghten P, Stilgoe J. Responsible research and innovation: from science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy. 2012;39:751-60.