• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

评估生物医学文献中的透明度指标:开放有多开放?

Assessment of transparency indicators across the biomedical literature: How open is open?

机构信息

Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, United States of America.

Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford, California, United States of America.

出版信息

PLoS Biol. 2021 Mar 1;19(3):e3001107. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001107. eCollection 2021 Mar.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pbio.3001107
PMID:33647013
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7951980/
Abstract

Recent concerns about the reproducibility of science have led to several calls for more open and transparent research practices and for the monitoring of potential improvements over time. However, with tens of thousands of new biomedical articles published per week, manually mapping and monitoring changes in transparency is unrealistic. We present an open-source, automated approach to identify 5 indicators of transparency (data sharing, code sharing, conflicts of interest disclosures, funding disclosures, and protocol registration) and apply it across the entire open access biomedical literature of 2.75 million articles on PubMed Central (PMC). Our results indicate remarkable improvements in some (e.g., conflict of interest [COI] disclosures and funding disclosures), but not other (e.g., protocol registration and code sharing) areas of transparency over time, and map transparency across fields of science, countries, journals, and publishers. This work has enabled the creation of a large, integrated, and openly available database to expedite further efforts to monitor, understand, and promote transparency and reproducibility in science.

摘要

最近,人们对科学研究的可重复性表示担忧,这促使人们呼吁采取更加开放和透明的研究实践,并对潜在的改进进行长期监测。然而,每周都会有数千篇新的生物医学文章发表,人工映射和监测透明度的变化是不现实的。我们提出了一种开源的自动化方法,用于识别 5 个透明度指标(数据共享、代码共享、利益冲突披露、资金披露和方案注册),并将其应用于 PubMed Central(PMC)上 275 万篇开放获取生物医学文献的所有文章中。我们的研究结果表明,在某些方面(例如,利益冲突[COI]披露和资金披露)取得了显著的改进,但在其他方面(例如,方案注册和代码共享)并没有随着时间的推移而得到改善,同时还绘制了科学领域、国家、期刊和出版商之间的透明度图谱。这项工作促成了一个大型的、集成的、公开可用的数据库的创建,以加速进一步努力监测、理解和促进科学研究的透明度和可重复性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3917/7951980/80f4246bd4b8/pbio.3001107.g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3917/7951980/033b11e88b89/pbio.3001107.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3917/7951980/4b128e53743e/pbio.3001107.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3917/7951980/341af9bb416c/pbio.3001107.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3917/7951980/d201b2633095/pbio.3001107.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3917/7951980/ac5f4c6ccf36/pbio.3001107.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3917/7951980/80f4246bd4b8/pbio.3001107.g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3917/7951980/033b11e88b89/pbio.3001107.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3917/7951980/4b128e53743e/pbio.3001107.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3917/7951980/341af9bb416c/pbio.3001107.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3917/7951980/d201b2633095/pbio.3001107.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3917/7951980/ac5f4c6ccf36/pbio.3001107.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3917/7951980/80f4246bd4b8/pbio.3001107.g006.jpg

相似文献

1
Assessment of transparency indicators across the biomedical literature: How open is open?评估生物医学文献中的透明度指标:开放有多开放?
PLoS Biol. 2021 Mar 1;19(3):e3001107. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001107. eCollection 2021 Mar.
2
Reproducible research practices, transparency, and open access data in the biomedical literature, 2015-2017.2015-2017 年生物医学文献中的可重复性研究实践、透明度和开放获取数据。
PLoS Biol. 2018 Nov 20;16(11):e2006930. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2006930. eCollection 2018 Nov.
3
Transparency in Infectious Disease Research: Meta-research Survey of Specialty Journals.传染病研究的透明度:专业期刊的元研究调查。
J Infect Dis. 2023 Aug 11;228(3):227-234. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiad130.
4
Transparency of COVID-19-related research: A meta-research study.新冠相关研究透明度:一项元研究。
PLoS One. 2023 Jul 26;18(7):e0288406. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288406. eCollection 2023.
5
Transparency of COVID-19-Related Research in Dental Journals.牙科期刊中与 COVID-19 相关研究的透明度
Front Oral Health. 2022 Apr 6;3:871033. doi: 10.3389/froh.2022.871033. eCollection 2022.
6
Research transparency in dental research: A programmatic analysis.口腔研究中的研究透明度:计划性分析。
Eur J Oral Sci. 2023 Feb;131(1):e12908. doi: 10.1111/eos.12908. Epub 2022 Dec 8.
7
Assessment of transparency indicators in space medicine.空间医学透明度指标评估。
PLoS One. 2024 Apr 2;19(4):e0300701. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300701. eCollection 2024.
8
Undisclosed Conflict of Interest Is Prevalent in Spine Literature.未披露的利益冲突在脊柱文献中普遍存在。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020 Nov 1;45(21):1524-1529. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003589.
9
A meta-epidemiological assessment of transparency indicators of infectious disease models.传染病模型透明度指标的元流行病学评估。
PLoS One. 2022 Oct 7;17(10):e0275380. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0275380. eCollection 2022.
10
Reproducible Research Practices and Transparency across the Biomedical Literature.生物医学文献中的可重复研究实践与透明度
PLoS Biol. 2016 Jan 4;14(1):e1002333. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002333. eCollection 2016 Jan.

引用本文的文献

1
Data sharing in acupuncture meta-analyses: Associations with journal policies and practical considerations.针灸荟萃分析中的数据共享:与期刊政策及实际考量的关联
Integr Med Res. 2026 Mar;15(1):101229. doi: 10.1016/j.imr.2025.101229. Epub 2025 Aug 19.
2
Provenance and Funding of Extremely Cited Biomedical Articles Published Between 2003 and 2024.2003年至2024年间发表的高被引生物医学文章的来源和资金资助情况。
JAMA Health Forum. 2025 Sep 5;6(9):e253045. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2025.3045.
3
Improving transparency in clinical trial reporting.

本文引用的文献

1
A manifesto for reproducible science.可重复科学宣言。
Nat Hum Behav. 2017 Jan 10;1(1):0021. doi: 10.1038/s41562-016-0021.
2
A detailed open access model of the PubMed literature.一个详细的 PubMed 文献开放获取模型。
Sci Data. 2020 Nov 20;7(1):408. doi: 10.1038/s41597-020-00749-y.
3
The Rigor and Transparency Index Quality Metric for Assessing Biological and Medical Science Methods.用于评估生物医学科学方法的严谨性与透明度指数质量指标
提高临床试验报告的透明度。
PLoS Med. 2025 Apr 28;22(4):e1004588. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004588. eCollection 2025 Apr.
4
Building a synthesis-ready research ecosystem: fostering collaboration and open science to accelerate biomedical translation.构建一个可供综合研究的生态系统:促进合作与开放科学以加速生物医学转化。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2025 Mar 10;25(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s12874-025-02524-2.
5
Guidance for sharing computational models of neural stimulation: from project planning to publication.神经刺激计算模型共享指南:从项目规划到发表
J Neural Eng. 2025 Mar 13;22(2). doi: 10.1088/1741-2552/adb997.
6
Describing the landscape of nutrition- and diet-related randomized controlled trials: metaresearch study of protocols published between 2012 and 2022.描述营养与饮食相关随机对照试验的概况:对2012年至2022年期间发表的试验方案进行的元研究
Am J Clin Nutr. 2025 Apr;121(4):882-891. doi: 10.1016/j.ajcnut.2025.01.016. Epub 2025 Jan 24.
7
Do randomised clinical trials on dental caries adopt Open Science practices?关于龋齿的随机临床试验是否采用了开放科学实践?
BMC Oral Health. 2024 Nov 23;24(1):1431. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-05218-1.
8
Indicators of transparency and data sharing in scientific writing in published randomized controlled trials in orthodontic journals between 2019 and 2023: an empirical study.2019 年至 2023 年发表在正畸期刊上的随机对照试验中科学写作的透明度和数据共享指标:一项实证研究。
Eur J Orthod. 2024 Dec 1;46(6). doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjae064.
9
COVID-19-related research data availability and quality according to the FAIR principles: A meta-research study.基于 FAIR 原则的 COVID-19 相关研究数据的可用性和质量:一项元研究。
PLoS One. 2024 Nov 18;19(11):e0313991. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0313991. eCollection 2024.
10
Transparency, bias, and reproducibility across science: a meta-research view.科学中的透明度、偏差和可重复性:元研究视角。
J Clin Invest. 2024 Nov 15;134(22):e181923. doi: 10.1172/JCI181923.
iScience. 2020 Oct 20;23(11):101698. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2020.101698. eCollection 2020 Nov 20.
4
Reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in health economic evaluations: study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis.可重复性研究实践、健康经济评估中的开放性和透明度:一项横断面比较分析的研究方案。
BMJ Open. 2020 Feb 13;10(2):e034463. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034463.
5
Examining influential factors for acknowledgements classification using supervised learning.使用有监督学习研究致谢分类的影响因素。
PLoS One. 2020 Feb 14;15(2):e0228928. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228928. eCollection 2020.
6
The NIH Open Citation Collection: A public access, broad coverage resource.NIH 开放引文集:一个公共获取、广泛覆盖的资源。
PLoS Biol. 2019 Oct 10;17(10):e3000385. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000385. eCollection 2019 Oct.
7
Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015.评估 2010 年至 2015 年期间《自然》和《科学》杂志上社会科学实验的可重复性。
Nat Hum Behav. 2018 Sep;2(9):637-644. doi: 10.1038/s41562-018-0399-z. Epub 2018 Aug 27.
8
Reproducible research practices, transparency, and open access data in the biomedical literature, 2015-2017.2015-2017 年生物医学文献中的可重复性研究实践、透明度和开放获取数据。
PLoS Biol. 2018 Nov 20;16(11):e2006930. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2006930. eCollection 2018 Nov.
9
Implications of the Credibility Revolution for Productivity, Creativity, and Progress.可信度革命对生产力、创造力和进步的影响。
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2018 Jul;13(4):411-417. doi: 10.1177/1745691617751884.
10
Making sense of replications.理解重复实验结果。
Elife. 2017 Jan 19;6:e23383. doi: 10.7554/eLife.23383.