Insufficient transparency of statistical reporting in preclinical research: a scoping review

Abstract Non-transparent statistical reporting contributes to the reproducibility crisis in life sciences, despite guidelines and educational articles regularly published. Envisioning more effective measures for ensuring transparency requires the detailed monitoring of incomplete reporting in the li...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Romain-Daniel Gosselin
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Nature Publishing Group 2021-02-01
Series:Scientific Reports
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-83006-5
id doaj-6410ffcf528242e891b0d44b0988c5b0
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6410ffcf528242e891b0d44b0988c5b02021-02-14T12:31:26ZengNature Publishing GroupScientific Reports2045-23222021-02-011111810.1038/s41598-021-83006-5Insufficient transparency of statistical reporting in preclinical research: a scoping reviewRomain-Daniel Gosselin0Precision Medicine Unit, Lausanne University HospitalAbstract Non-transparent statistical reporting contributes to the reproducibility crisis in life sciences, despite guidelines and educational articles regularly published. Envisioning more effective measures for ensuring transparency requires the detailed monitoring of incomplete reporting in the literature. In this study, a systematic approach was used to sample 16 periodicals from the ISI Journal Citation Report database and to collect 233 preclinical articles (including both in vitro and animal research) from online journal content published in 2019. Statistical items related to the use of location tests were quantified. Results revealed that a large proportion of articles insufficiently describe tests (median 44.8%, IQR [33.3–62.5%], k = 16 journals), software (31%, IQR [22.3–39.6%]) or sample sizes (44.2%, IQR [35.7–55.4%]). The results further point at contradictory information as a component of poor reporting (18.3%, IQR [6.79–26.7%]). No detectable correlation was found between journal impact factor and the quality of statistical reporting of any studied item. The under-representation of open-source software (4.50% of articles) suggests that the provision of code should remain restricted to articles that use such packages. Since mounting evidence indicates that transparency is key for reproducible science, this work highlights the need for a more rigorous enforcement of existing guidelines.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-83006-5
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Romain-Daniel Gosselin
spellingShingle Romain-Daniel Gosselin
Insufficient transparency of statistical reporting in preclinical research: a scoping review
Scientific Reports
author_facet Romain-Daniel Gosselin
author_sort Romain-Daniel Gosselin
title Insufficient transparency of statistical reporting in preclinical research: a scoping review
title_short Insufficient transparency of statistical reporting in preclinical research: a scoping review
title_full Insufficient transparency of statistical reporting in preclinical research: a scoping review
title_fullStr Insufficient transparency of statistical reporting in preclinical research: a scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Insufficient transparency of statistical reporting in preclinical research: a scoping review
title_sort insufficient transparency of statistical reporting in preclinical research: a scoping review
publisher Nature Publishing Group
series Scientific Reports
issn 2045-2322
publishDate 2021-02-01
description Abstract Non-transparent statistical reporting contributes to the reproducibility crisis in life sciences, despite guidelines and educational articles regularly published. Envisioning more effective measures for ensuring transparency requires the detailed monitoring of incomplete reporting in the literature. In this study, a systematic approach was used to sample 16 periodicals from the ISI Journal Citation Report database and to collect 233 preclinical articles (including both in vitro and animal research) from online journal content published in 2019. Statistical items related to the use of location tests were quantified. Results revealed that a large proportion of articles insufficiently describe tests (median 44.8%, IQR [33.3–62.5%], k = 16 journals), software (31%, IQR [22.3–39.6%]) or sample sizes (44.2%, IQR [35.7–55.4%]). The results further point at contradictory information as a component of poor reporting (18.3%, IQR [6.79–26.7%]). No detectable correlation was found between journal impact factor and the quality of statistical reporting of any studied item. The under-representation of open-source software (4.50% of articles) suggests that the provision of code should remain restricted to articles that use such packages. Since mounting evidence indicates that transparency is key for reproducible science, this work highlights the need for a more rigorous enforcement of existing guidelines.
url https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-83006-5
work_keys_str_mv AT romaindanielgosselin insufficienttransparencyofstatisticalreportinginpreclinicalresearchascopingreview
_version_ 1724270287068856320