TY - JOUR
T1 - A framework for improving the quality of research in the biological sciences
AU - Casadevall, Arturo
AU - Ellis, Lee M.
AU - Davies, Erika W.
AU - McFall-Ngai, Margaret
AU - Fang, Ferric C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Casadevall et al.
PY - 2016/7/1
Y1 - 2016/7/1
N2 - The American Academy of Microbiology convened a colloquium to discuss problems in the biological sciences, with emphasis on identifying mechanisms to improve the quality of research. Participants from various disciplines made six recommendations: (i) design rigorous and comprehensive evaluation criteria to recognize and reward high-quality scientific research; (ii) require universal training in good scientific practices, appropriate statistical usage, and responsible research practices for scientists at all levels, with training content regularly updated and presented by qualified scientists; (iii) establish open data at the timing of publication as the standard operating procedure throughout the scientific enterprise; (iv) encourage scientific journals to publish negative data that meet methodologic standards of quality; (v) agree upon common criteria among scientific journals for retraction of published papers, to provide consistency and transparency; and (vi) strengthen research integrity oversight and training. These recommendations constitute an actionable framework that, in combination, could improve the quality of biological research.
AB - The American Academy of Microbiology convened a colloquium to discuss problems in the biological sciences, with emphasis on identifying mechanisms to improve the quality of research. Participants from various disciplines made six recommendations: (i) design rigorous and comprehensive evaluation criteria to recognize and reward high-quality scientific research; (ii) require universal training in good scientific practices, appropriate statistical usage, and responsible research practices for scientists at all levels, with training content regularly updated and presented by qualified scientists; (iii) establish open data at the timing of publication as the standard operating procedure throughout the scientific enterprise; (iv) encourage scientific journals to publish negative data that meet methodologic standards of quality; (v) agree upon common criteria among scientific journals for retraction of published papers, to provide consistency and transparency; and (vi) strengthen research integrity oversight and training. These recommendations constitute an actionable framework that, in combination, could improve the quality of biological research.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84986607507&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84986607507&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1128/mBio.01256-16
DO - 10.1128/mBio.01256-16
M3 - Article
C2 - 27578756
AN - SCOPUS:84986607507
SN - 2161-2129
VL - 7
JO - mBio
JF - mBio
IS - 4
M1 - e01256-16
ER -