Toomey Elaine, Coyne Rory, Derksen Christina, Grant Sean P, Jones Christopher M, Kijowska Marta, McNeill Ilona, Naughton Felix, O'Mahony Aoife, Norris Emma
Centre for Health Research Methodology, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Áras Moyola, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Institute for Clinical Trials, College of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Health Psychol Rev. 2025 Jun 13:1-18. doi: 10.1080/17437199.2025.2516010.
Scientific journals play a crucial role in promoting open science. The Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines identify a range of standards that journals can adopt to promote the verifiability of the research they publish. We evaluated the adoption of TOP standards within health psychology and behavioural medicine journal policies, as this had not yet been systematically assessed. In a cross-sectional study on 19 health psychology and behavioural medicine journals, eight raters evaluated TOP standard adoption by these journals using the TRUST journal policy evaluation tool. Out of a total possible score of 29, journal scores ranged from 1 to 13 (median = 6). Standards related to use of reporting guidelines and data transparency were adopted the most, whereas standards related to pre-registration of study analysis plans and citation of code were adopted the least. TOP guidelines have to-date been poorly adopted within health psychology and behavioural medicine journal policies. There are several relatively straightforward opportunities for improvement, such as expanding policies around research data to also consider code and materials, and reducing ambiguity of wording. However, other improvements may require a collaborative approach involving all research stakeholders.
科学期刊在推动开放科学方面发挥着关键作用。透明度与开放性促进(TOP)指南确定了一系列期刊可采用的标准,以提高其所发表研究的可验证性。我们评估了健康心理学和行为医学期刊政策中TOP标准的采用情况,因为此前尚未对此进行系统评估。在一项针对19种健康心理学和行为医学期刊的横断面研究中,八位评估者使用TRUST期刊政策评估工具对这些期刊采用TOP标准的情况进行了评估。在总分29分的情况下,期刊得分从1分至13分不等(中位数 = 6)。与使用报告指南和数据透明度相关的标准采用得最多,而与研究分析计划的预注册和代码引用相关的标准采用得最少。到目前为止,TOP指南在健康心理学和行为医学期刊政策中的采用情况不佳。有几个相对直接的改进机会,例如扩大围绕研究数据的政策范围,以同时考虑代码和材料,并减少措辞的模糊性。然而,其他改进可能需要所有研究利益相关者共同参与的协作方法。