Sansbury Brian E, Nystoriak Matthew A, Uchida Shizuka, Wysoczynski Marcin, Moore Joseph B
Diabetes and Obesity Center, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, KY, United States.
Center for RNA Medicine, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022 Jul 1;9:913612. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.913612. eCollection 2022.
Scientific advancement is predicated upon the ability of a novel discovery to be independently reproduced and substantiated by others. Despite this inherent necessity, the research community is awash in published studies that cannot be replicated resulting in widespread confusion within the field and waning trust from the general public. In many cases, irreproducibility is the unavoidable consequence of a study that is conducted without the appropriate degree of rigor, typified by fundamental flaws in approach, design, execution, analysis, interpretation, and reporting. Combatting the irreproducibility pandemic in preclinical research is of urgent concern and is the primary responsibility of individual investigators, however there are important roles to be played by institutions, journals, government entities, and funding agencies as well. Herein, we provide an updated review of established rigor criteria pertaining to both and studies compiled from multiple sources across the research enterprise and present a practical checklist as a straightforward reference guide. It is our hope that this review may serve as an approachable resource for early career and experienced investigators alike, as they strive to improve all aspects of their scientific endeavors.
科学进步取决于一项新发现能否被他人独立复制和证实。尽管有这种内在的必要性,但研究界充斥着无法被复制的已发表研究,这导致该领域内普遍混乱,公众信任度下降。在许多情况下,不可重复性是研究缺乏适当严谨程度的不可避免结果,其典型表现为方法、设计、执行、分析、解释和报告方面的根本缺陷。应对临床前研究中的不可重复性流行问题迫在眉睫,这是个别研究人员的主要责任,但机构、期刊、政府实体和资助机构也应发挥重要作用。在此,我们提供了一份更新后的综述,内容涉及从整个研究领域的多个来源汇编的既定严谨标准,并给出一份实用清单作为直接的参考指南。我们希望这份综述能成为初出茅庐和经验丰富的研究人员都能使用的资源,帮助他们努力改进科研工作的各个方面。