Gorman Dennis M, Ferdinand Alva O
Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX USA.
Department of Health Policy & Management, School of Public Health, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX USA.
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2020 Aug 31;5:12. doi: 10.1186/s41073-020-00098-9. eCollection 2020.
The rigor and integrity of the published research in nutrition studies has come into serious question in recent years. Concerns focus on the use of flexible data analysis practices and selective reporting and the failure of peer review journals to identify and correct these practices. In response, it has been proposed that journals employ editorial procedures designed to improve the transparency of published research.
The present study examines the adoption of editorial procedures designed to improve the reporting of empirical studies in the field of nutrition and dietetics research.
The instructions for authors of 43 journals included in Quartiles 1 and 2 of the Clarivate Analytics' 2018 Journal Citation Report category were reviewed. For journals that published original research, conflict of interest disclosure, recommendation of reporting guidelines, registration of clinical trials, registration of other types of studies, encouraging data sharing, and use of the Registered Reports were assessed For journals that only published reviews, all of the procedures except clinical trial registration were assessed.
Thirty-three journals published original research and 10 published only reviews. Conflict of interest disclosure was required by all 33 original research journals. Use of guidelines, trial registration and encouragement of data sharing were mentioned by 30, 27 and 25 journals, respectively. Registration of other studies was required by eight and none offered Registered Reports as a publication option at the time of the review. All 10 review journals required conflict of interest disclosure, four recommended data sharing and three the use of guidelines. None mentioned the other two procedures.
While nutrition journals have adopted a number of procedures designed to improve the reporting of research findings, their limited effects likely result from the mechanisms through which they influence analytic flexibility and selective reporting and the extent to which they are properly implemented and enforced by journals.
近年来,营养研究领域已发表研究的严谨性和完整性受到严重质疑。人们关注的焦点在于灵活的数据分析方法、选择性报告的使用,以及同行评审期刊未能识别和纠正这些做法。对此,有人提议期刊采用旨在提高已发表研究透明度的编辑程序。
本研究考察旨在改善营养与饮食学研究领域实证研究报告情况的编辑程序的采用情况。
对科睿唯安2018年期刊引证报告分类中第一和第二四分位数的43种期刊的作者指南进行了审查。对于发表原创研究的期刊,评估了利益冲突披露、报告指南的推荐、临床试验注册、其他类型研究的注册、鼓励数据共享以及使用预注册报告的情况。对于仅发表综述的期刊,评估了除临床试验注册之外的所有程序。
33种期刊发表原创研究,10种仅发表综述。所有33种原创研究期刊都要求披露利益冲突。30种、27种和25种期刊分别提及了指南的使用、试验注册和鼓励数据共享。8种期刊要求对其他研究进行注册,在审查时没有期刊将预注册报告作为一种出版选项。所有10种综述期刊都要求披露利益冲突,4种推荐数据共享,3种推荐使用指南。没有期刊提及其他两项程序。
虽然营养学期刊已采用了一些旨在改善研究结果报告情况的程序,但其效果有限可能是由于它们影响分析灵活性和选择性报告的机制,以及期刊对其正确实施和执行的程度。