Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:8
Page 3 of 3
Publishing descriptions of non-public clinical datasets: proposed guidance for researchers, repositories, editors and funding organisations
Sharing of experimental clinical research data usually happens between individuals or research groups rather than via public repositories, in part due to the need to protect research participant privacy. This ...
Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:6
Although the number of reporting guidelines has grown rapidly, few have gone through an updating process. The STARD statement (Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy), published in 2003 to help improve th...
Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:7
This editorial explains why we are launching Research Integrity and Peer Review, a new open-access journal that will provide a home to research on ethics, reporting, and evaluation of research. We discuss how the...
Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:5
Developing the Clarity and Openness in Reporting: E3-based (CORE) Reference user manual for creation of clinical study reports in the era of clinical trial transparency
Interventional clinical studies conducted in the regulated drug research environment are reported using International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) regulatory guidance documents: ICH E3 on the structure and ...
Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:4
Propagation of errors in citation networks: a study involving the entire citation network of a widely cited paper published in, and later retracted from, the journal Nature
In about one in 10,000 cases, a published article is retracted. This very often means that the results it reports are flawed. Several authors have voiced concerns about the presence of retracted research in th...
Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:3
Sex and gender differences are often overlooked in research design, study implementation and scientific reporting, as well as in general science communication. This oversight limits the generalizability of res...
Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:2
Conflict of interest disclosure in biomedical research: a review of current practices, biases, and the role of public registries in improving transparency
Conflicts of interest held by researchers remain a focus of attention in clinical research. Biases related to these relationships have the potential to directly impact the quality of healthcare by influencing ...
Citation: Research Integrity and Peer Review 2016 1:1
- ISSN: 2058-8615 (electronic)