The quality of methods reporting in parasitology experiments.

There is a growing concern both inside and outside the scientific community over the lack of reproducibility of experiments. The depth and detail of reported methods are critical to the reproducibility of findings, but also for making it possible to compare and integrate data from different studies....

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Oscar Flórez-Vargas, Michael Bramhall, Harry Noyes, Sheena Cruickshank, Robert Stevens, Andy Brass
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2014
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/08c477114eb941eaa3e5c27860da44b2
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:08c477114eb941eaa3e5c27860da44b2
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:08c477114eb941eaa3e5c27860da44b22021-11-25T06:06:41ZThe quality of methods reporting in parasitology experiments.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0101131https://doaj.org/article/08c477114eb941eaa3e5c27860da44b22014-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/25076044/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203There is a growing concern both inside and outside the scientific community over the lack of reproducibility of experiments. The depth and detail of reported methods are critical to the reproducibility of findings, but also for making it possible to compare and integrate data from different studies. In this study, we evaluated in detail the methods reporting in a comprehensive set of trypanosomiasis experiments that should enable valid reproduction, integration and comparison of research findings. We evaluated a subset of other parasitic (Leishmania, Toxoplasma, Plasmodium, Trichuris and Schistosoma) and non-parasitic (Mycobacterium) experimental infections in order to compare the quality of method reporting more generally. A systematic review using PubMed (2000-2012) of all publications describing gene expression in cells and animals infected with Trypanosoma spp was undertaken based on PRISMA guidelines; 23 papers were identified and included. We defined a checklist of essential parameters that should be reported and have scored the number of those parameters that are reported for each publication. Bibliometric parameters (impact factor, citations and h-index) were used to look for association between Journal and Author status and the quality of method reporting. Trichuriasis experiments achieved the highest scores and included the only paper to score 100% in all criteria. The mean of scores achieved by Trypanosoma articles through the checklist was 65.5% (range 32-90%). Bibliometric parameters were not correlated with the quality of method reporting (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient <-0.5; p>0.05). Our results indicate that the quality of methods reporting in experimental parasitology is a cause for concern and it has not improved over time, despite there being evidence that most of the assessed parameters do influence the results. We propose that our set of parameters be used as guidelines to improve the quality of the reporting of experimental infection models as a pre-requisite for integrating and comparing sets of data.Oscar Flórez-VargasMichael BramhallHarry NoyesSheena CruickshankRobert StevensAndy BrassPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 9, Iss 7, p e101131 (2014)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Oscar Flórez-Vargas Michael Bramhall Harry Noyes Sheena Cruickshank Robert Stevens Andy Brass The quality of methods reporting in parasitology experiments.
description	There is a growing concern both inside and outside the scientific community over the lack of reproducibility of experiments. The depth and detail of reported methods are critical to the reproducibility of findings, but also for making it possible to compare and integrate data from different studies. In this study, we evaluated in detail the methods reporting in a comprehensive set of trypanosomiasis experiments that should enable valid reproduction, integration and comparison of research findings. We evaluated a subset of other parasitic (Leishmania, Toxoplasma, Plasmodium, Trichuris and Schistosoma) and non-parasitic (Mycobacterium) experimental infections in order to compare the quality of method reporting more generally. A systematic review using PubMed (2000-2012) of all publications describing gene expression in cells and animals infected with Trypanosoma spp was undertaken based on PRISMA guidelines; 23 papers were identified and included. We defined a checklist of essential parameters that should be reported and have scored the number of those parameters that are reported for each publication. Bibliometric parameters (impact factor, citations and h-index) were used to look for association between Journal and Author status and the quality of method reporting. Trichuriasis experiments achieved the highest scores and included the only paper to score 100% in all criteria. The mean of scores achieved by Trypanosoma articles through the checklist was 65.5% (range 32-90%). Bibliometric parameters were not correlated with the quality of method reporting (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient <-0.5; p>0.05). Our results indicate that the quality of methods reporting in experimental parasitology is a cause for concern and it has not improved over time, despite there being evidence that most of the assessed parameters do influence the results. We propose that our set of parameters be used as guidelines to improve the quality of the reporting of experimental infection models as a pre-requisite for integrating and comparing sets of data.
format	article
author	Oscar Flórez-Vargas Michael Bramhall Harry Noyes Sheena Cruickshank Robert Stevens Andy Brass
author_facet	Oscar Flórez-Vargas Michael Bramhall Harry Noyes Sheena Cruickshank Robert Stevens Andy Brass
author_sort	Oscar Flórez-Vargas
title	The quality of methods reporting in parasitology experiments.
title_short	The quality of methods reporting in parasitology experiments.
title_full	The quality of methods reporting in parasitology experiments.
title_fullStr	The quality of methods reporting in parasitology experiments.
title_full_unstemmed	The quality of methods reporting in parasitology experiments.
title_sort	quality of methods reporting in parasitology experiments.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2014
url	https://doaj.org/article/08c477114eb941eaa3e5c27860da44b2
work_keys_str_mv	AT oscarflorezvargas thequalityofmethodsreportinginparasitologyexperiments AT michaelbramhall thequalityofmethodsreportinginparasitologyexperiments AT harrynoyes thequalityofmethodsreportinginparasitologyexperiments AT sheenacruickshank thequalityofmethodsreportinginparasitologyexperiments AT robertstevens thequalityofmethodsreportinginparasitologyexperiments AT andybrass thequalityofmethodsreportinginparasitologyexperiments AT oscarflorezvargas qualityofmethodsreportinginparasitologyexperiments AT michaelbramhall qualityofmethodsreportinginparasitologyexperiments AT harrynoyes qualityofmethodsreportinginparasitologyexperiments AT sheenacruickshank qualityofmethodsreportinginparasitologyexperiments AT robertstevens qualityofmethodsreportinginparasitologyexperiments AT andybrass qualityofmethodsreportinginparasitologyexperiments
_version_	1718414146149548032

The quality of methods reporting in parasitology experiments.

Ejemplares similares