Publishers' Responsibilities in Promoting Data Quality and Reproducibility
- PMID:31691858
- DOI: 10.1007/164_2019_290
Publishers' Responsibilities in Promoting Data Quality and Reproducibility
Abstract
Scholarly publishers can help to increase data quality and reproducible research by promoting transparency and openness. Increasing transparency can be achieved by publishers in six key areas: (1) understanding researchers' problems and motivations, by conducting and responding to the findings of surveys; (2) raising awareness of issues and encouraging behavioural and cultural change, by introducing consistent journal policies on sharing research data, code and materials; (3) improving the quality and objectivity of the peer-review process by implementing reporting guidelines and checklists and using technology to identify misconduct; (4) improving scholarly communication infrastructure with journals that publish all scientifically sound research, promoting study registration, partnering with data repositories and providing services that improve data sharing and data curation; (5) increasing incentives for practising open research with data journals and software journals and implementing data citation and badges for transparency; and (6) making research communication more open and accessible, with open-access publishing options, permitting text and data mining and sharing publisher data and metadata and through industry and community collaboration. This chapter describes practical approaches being taken by publishers, in these six areas, their progress and effectiveness and the implications for researchers publishing their work.
Keywords: Data sharing; Open access; Open science; Peer review; Publishing; Reporting guidelines; Reproducible research; Research data; Scholarly communication.
Similar articles
- Best practices for scholarly authors in the age of predatory journals.Beall J.Beall J.Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2016 Feb;98(2):77-9. doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2016.0056.Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2016.PMID:26829665Free PMC article.
- False gold: Safely navigating open access publishing to avoid predatory publishers and journals.McCann TV, Polacsek M.McCann TV, et al.J Adv Nurs. 2018 Apr;74(4):809-817. doi: 10.1111/jan.13483. Epub 2017 Nov 17.J Adv Nurs. 2018.PMID:29047152
- Journal publication ethics and implications for life science researchers: a COPE perspective.Lane T.Lane T.Emerg Top Life Sci. 2018 Dec 21;2(6):763-767. doi: 10.1042/ETLS20180164.Emerg Top Life Sci. 2018.PMID:33530669
- Publishing Ethics and Predatory Practices: A Dilemma for All Stakeholders of Science Communication.Gasparyan AY, Yessirkepov M, Diyanova SN, Kitas GD.Gasparyan AY, et al.J Korean Med Sci. 2015 Aug;30(8):1010-6. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2015.30.8.1010. Epub 2015 Jul 15.J Korean Med Sci. 2015.PMID:26240476Free PMC article.Review.
- The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review.Tennant JP, Waldner F, Jacques DC, Masuzzo P, Collister LB, Hartgerink CH.Tennant JP, et al.F1000Res. 2016 Apr 11;5:632. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.8460.3. eCollection 2016.F1000Res. 2016.PMID:27158456Free PMC article.Review.
Cited by
- Publishing computational research - a review of infrastructures for reproducible and transparent scholarly communication.Konkol M, Nüst D, Goulier L.Konkol M, et al.Res Integr Peer Rev. 2020 Jul 14;5:10. doi: 10.1186/s41073-020-00095-y. eCollection 2020.Res Integr Peer Rev. 2020.PMID:32685199Free PMC article.Review.
- The role of metadata in reproducible computational research.Leipzig J, Nüst D, Hoyt CT, Ram K, Greenberg J.Leipzig J, et al.Patterns (N Y). 2021 Sep 10;2(9):100322. doi: 10.1016/j.patter.2021.100322. eCollection 2021 Sep 10.Patterns (N Y). 2021.PMID:34553169Free PMC article.Review.
- Design and validation of a conceptual model regarding impact of open science on healthcare research processes.Zarghani M, Nemati-Anaraki L, Sedghi S, Chakoli AN, Rowhani-Farid A.Zarghani M, et al.BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Mar 7;24(1):309. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-10764-z.BMC Health Serv Res. 2024.PMID:38454424Free PMC article.
- A survey of researchers' code sharing and code reuse practices, and assessment of interactive notebook prototypes.Cadwallader L, Hrynaszkiewicz I.Cadwallader L, et al.PeerJ. 2022 Aug 22;10:e13933. doi: 10.7717/peerj.13933. eCollection 2022.PeerJ. 2022.PMID:36032954Free PMC article.
- Identifying Data Sharing and Reuse with Scholix: Potentials and Limitations.Khan N, Pink CJ, Thelwall M.Khan N, et al.Patterns (N Y). 2020 Apr 10;1(1):100007. doi: 10.1016/j.patter.2020.100007. eCollection 2020 Apr 10.Patterns (N Y). 2020.PMID:33205084Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources