Poor research design and data analysis encourage false-positive findings. The persistence of poor methods results partly from incentives that favour them, leading to the natural selection of bad science.

Study sent the same dataset to 70 teams for analysis, and no two teams chose identical workflows to analyze the data.

This report from the Royal Historical Society (RHS) assesses the extent of History journals’ engagement with, and preparedness for, implementation of Plan S-aligned open access (OA) mandates.

This report provides quantitative and descriptive data on the availability and usage of various open access options in different fields and subdisciplines. Its goal was to inform Coalition S funders on the open access options and identify fields where there is a need to increase the share of open access journals/platforms.

The question whether the practice of preregistration is valuable depends on your philosophy of science. Daniel Lakens provides a conceptual analysis of the value of preregistration for psychological science from an error statistical philosophy. 

Open science will make science more efficient, reliable and responsive to societal challenges. The European Commission has sought to advance Open Science policy from its inception in a holistic and integrated way, covering all aspects of the research cycle from scientific discovery and review to sharing knowledge, publishing and outreach. 

Managing a New University Press (NUP) is often a one-person operation and, with limits on time and resources, efficiency and effectiveness are key to having a successful production process and providing a high level of author, editor and reader services. This article looks at the challenges faced by open access (OA) university presses throughout the publishing journey and considers ways in which these challenges can be addressed. In particular, the article focuses on six key stages throughout the lifecycle of an open access publication: commissioning; review; production; discoverability; marketing; analytics. Approached from the point of view of the University of Huddersfield Press, this article also draws on discussions and experiences of other NUPs from community-led forums and events. By highlighting the issues faced, and the potential solutions to them, this research recognises the need for a tailored and formalised production workflow within NUPs and also provides guidance how to begin implementing possible solutions.

By examining publication records of scientists from four disciplines, the authors show that coauthoring a paper with a top-cited scientist early in one's career predicts lasting increases in career success, especially for researchers affiliated with less prestigious institutions.

The study of science itself is a growing field of research. Also known as meta-science or the science of science, it involves studying the processes and decisions that shape the evolution of scientific research. This collection of articles highlights the breadth of meta-research with articles on topics as diverse as gender bias in peer review, statistical power in clinical trials and the readability of the scientific literature.

Study find that Impact Factors (IF) are highly volatile. For example, one in ten journals had their IF boosted by more than 50% by their top three cited papers.

Study finds that the number of publications in open access journals rises every year, while the number of publications in questionable journals decreases from 2012 onwards. Both early career and more senior researchers publish in questionable journals.

Addressing the most pressing contemporary social, environmental, and technological challenges will require integrating insights and sharing data across disciplines, geographies, and cultures. Strengthening international data sharing networks will not only demand advancing technical, legal, and logistical infrastructure for publishing data in open, accessible formats; it will also require recognizing, respecting, and learning to work across diverse data cultures. This essay introduces a heuristic for pursuing richer characterizations of the “data cultures” at play in international, interdisciplinary data sharing. 

Data from conventional sources cannot fully measure progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Here the authors present a roadmap describing how citizen-science data can integrate traditional data and make a significant contribution in support of the SDGs agenda.

Study explores the place of preprints in the research lifecycle from the points of view of researchers, research performing organisations, research funding organisations and preprint servers/service providers.

This article discusses how data citation has evolved over the last couple of decades and highlights issues that need more research and attention.

Early career researchers commonly peer review manuscripts on behalf of invited reviewers, often without receiving feedback or being named to the journal.

There is little reason to expect that preregistration will spontaneously help researchers to develop better theories (and, hence, better methods and analyses).

In the context of a growing international focus on open access publishing options and mandates, this paper explores the extent to which the ideals of ‘openness’ are also being applied to physical knowledge resources and research spaces.

Discussions of how to improve research quality are predominant in a number of fields, including education. But how prevalent are the use of problematic practices and the improved practices meant to counter them?

The problem of access to medical information, particularly in low-income countries, has been under discussion for many years. Paywalls still limit access to approximately 75% of scholarly documents. This study compares the accessibility of recent full text articles in the field of ophthalmology in 27 established institutions located worldwide.

Established indicators for research and innovation processes do not sufficiently capture the nuances of open science and open innovation. As a result, their opportunities and risks often remain obscure. A new discussion paper therefore makes proposals for the expansion of existing indicators and the development of new ones.

Effective Research Data Management (RDM) is a key component of research integrity and reproducible research, and its importance is increasingly emphasised by funding bodies, governments, and research institutions around the world. However, many researchers are unfamiliar with RDM best practices, and research support staff are faced with the difficult task of delivering support to researchers across different disciplines and career stages. What strategies can institutions use to solve these problems? Engaging Researchers with Data Management is an invaluable collection of 24 case studies, drawn from institutions across the globe, that demonstrate clearly and practically how to engage the research community with RDM.

The State of Open Data 2019 report is the fourth in the series and includes survey results and a collection of articles from global industry experts.It is now the longest running longitudinal study on the subject, which was created in 2016 to examine attitudes and experiences of researchers working with open data - sharing it, reusing it, and redistributing it. This year's survey received a record number of survey participants with around 8,500 responses from the research community. While most trends are encouraging around the adoption and acceptance of open data, the research community is now demanding more enforcement of the mandates that have been adopted by many governments, funders, publishers and institutions around the world.The majority of researchers want funding withheld and penalties for a lack of data sharing.

The U.S. health care system uses commercial algorithms to guide health decisions. Obermeyer et al. find evidence of racial bias in one widely used algorithm, such that Black patients assigned the same level of risk by the algorithm are sicker than White patients (see the Perspective by Benjamin). The authors estimated that this racial bias reduces the number of Black patients identified for extra care by more than half.

Based on the data collected for the 2019 Big Deals Survey Report, this publication aims to deliver additional transparency of the dynamics of the scholarly publishing market by providing insights and indicators on the costs, publication volumes and timelines of Big Deal contracts.

How can the scientific community support researchers with mental health issues?

Background Core outcome sets (COS) have the potential to reduce waste in research by improving the consistency of outcomes measured in trials of the same health condition. However, this reduction in waste will only be realised through the uptake of COS by clinical trialists. Without uptake, the continued development of COS that are not implemented may add to waste in research. Funders of clinical trials have the potential to have an impact on COS uptake by recommending their use to those applying for funding. The aim of our study was to assess the extent to which applicants followed the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) programme's recommendation to search for a COS to include in their clinical trial. Methods and findings We examined the outcomes section and detailed project descriptions of all 95 researcher-led primary research applications submitted to the NIHR HTA between January 2012, when the recommendation to search for a COS was included in the guidance for applicants, and December 2015 for evidence that a search for a COS had taken place and rationale for outcome choice in the absence of COS. A survey of applicants was conducted to further explore their use of COS and choice of outcomes with a response rate of 49%. Nine out of 95 applicants (10%) stated in their application that they had searched the COMET (Core Outcome Measures for Effectiveness Trials) Initiative database for a COS and another nine referred to searching for a COS using another method, e.g. a review of the literature. Of the 77 (81%) applicants that did not mention COMET or COS in their application, eight stated in the survey that they had searched the COMET database and ten carried out a search using another method. Some applicants who did not search for a COS gave reasons for their choice of outcomes including taking advice from patients and the public and choosing outcomes used in previous trials. Conclusion A funding body can have an impact on COS uptake by encouraging trialists to search for a COS. Funders could take further steps by putting processes in place to prompt applicants to be explicit about searching for COS in their application and notifying the funding board if a search has not taken place. The sources of information used by trialists to make decisions about outcomes in the absence of COS may suggest methods of dissemination for COS.

Study investigates whether industry involvement in biomedical research affects trial design. A reduced use of active controls (such as alternate treatment or standard care) was found in trials with industry involvement, which can have the side effect of making results look more favourable than they actually are.

Sanctions place "invisible barriers" for research by limiting access to necessary resources and curtailing their effective use. This paper presents a national survey of Sudanese academics focused on the impact of 20 years of economic sanctions. It identifies key areas that have been impacted by international sanctions, and highlights how the impact on academia is likely to persist long after they are formally lifted.