A checklist is associated with increased quality of reporting preclinical biomedical research: A systematic review
Published 2017 View Full Article
- Home
- Publications
- Publication Search
- Publication Details
Title
A checklist is associated with increased quality of reporting preclinical biomedical research: A systematic review
Authors
Keywords
Animal studies, Research reporting guidelines, Scientific publishing, Reproducibility, Clinical trials, Inbred strains, Genetically modified animals, Systematic reviews
Journal
PLoS One
Volume 12, Issue 9, Pages e0183591
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Online
2017-09-14
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0183591
References
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Related references
Note: Only part of the references are listed.- The False Discovery Rate: A Key Concept in Large-Scale Genetic Studies
- (2017) James J. Chen et al. Cancer Control
- 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility
- (2016) Monya Baker NATURE
- What does research reproducibility mean?
- (2016) Steven N. Goodman et al. Science Translational Medicine
- Protocol for a retrospective, controlled cohort study of the impact of a change in Nature journals’ editorial policy for life sciences research on the completeness of reporting study design and execution
- (2016) Fala Cramond et al. SCIENTOMETRICS
- Bias in the reporting of sex and age in biomedical research on mouse models
- (2016) Oscar Flórez-Vargas et al. eLife
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of the World Health Organization surgical safety checklist on postoperative complications
- (2014) J. Bergs et al. BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY
- Reproducibility
- (2014) M. McNutt SCIENCE
- Two Years Later: Journals Are Not Yet Enforcing the ARRIVE Guidelines on Reporting Standards for Pre-Clinical Animal Studies
- (2014) David Baker et al. PLOS BIOLOGY
- Announcement: Reducing our irreproducibility
- (2013) NATURE
- A Survey on Data Reproducibility in Cancer Research Provides Insights into Our Limited Ability to Translate Findings from the Laboratory to the Clinic
- (2013) Aaron Mobley et al. PLoS One
- Rigid guidelines may restrict research
- (2012) Richard Morris NATURE
- A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research
- (2012) Story C. Landis et al. NATURE
- Raise standards for preclinical cancer research
- (2012) C. Glenn Begley et al. NATURE
- The implementation of a perioperative checklist increases patients' perioperative safety and staff satisfaction
- (2011) A. B. BÖHMER et al. ACTA ANAESTHESIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA
- Believe it or not: how much can we rely on published data on potential drug targets?
- (2011) Florian Prinz et al. NATURE REVIEWS DRUG DISCOVERY
- Reproducible Science
- (2010) A. Casadevall et al. INFECTION AND IMMUNITY
- Perspectives in quality: designing the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist
- (2010) T. G. Weiser et al. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR QUALITY IN HEALTH CARE
- Improving Bioscience Research Reporting: The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research
- (2010) Carol Kilkenny et al. PLOS BIOLOGY
- Reproducible research and Biostatistics
- (2009) Roger D. Peng BIOSTATISTICS
- Alternatives to randomisation in the evaluation of public-health interventions: statistical analysis and causal inference
- (2009) S. Cousens et al. JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY AND COMMUNITY HEALTH
- A Surgical Safety Checklist to Reduce Morbidity and Mortality in a Global Population
- (2009) Alex B. Haynes et al. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
Create your own webinar
Interested in hosting your own webinar? Check the schedule and propose your idea to the Peeref Content Team.
Create NowBecome a Peeref-certified reviewer
The Peeref Institute provides free reviewer training that teaches the core competencies of the academic peer review process.
Get Started