TY - JOUR
T1 - Scoping review and evidence mapping of interventions aimed at improving reproducible and replicable science: Protocol
AU - Dudda, Leonie
AU - Kozula, Magdalena
AU - Ross-Hellauer, Tony
AU - Kormann, Eva
AU - Spijker, René
AU - DeVito, Nicholas J
AU - Gopalakrishna, Gowri
AU - Eynden, Veerle Van den
AU - Onghena, Patrick
AU - Naudet, Florian
AU - Banzi, Rita
AU - Fratelli, Maddalena
AU - Varga, Monika
AU - Gelsleichter, Yuri Andrei
AU - Stegeman, Inge
AU - Leeflang, Mariska M G
PY - 2023/10/18
Y1 - 2023/10/18
N2 - Background Many interventions, especially those linked to open science, have been proposed to combat the reproducibility crisis. To what extent these propositions are based on scientific evidence from empirical evaluations is not clear. Aims The primary objective is to identify interventions that have been formally investigated regarding their influence on reproducibility and replicability. A secondary objective is to list any facilitators or barriers reported and to identify gaps in the evidence. Methods We will search broadly by using electronic bibliographic databases, broad internet search, and contacting experts in the field of reproducibility, replicability, and open science. Any study investigating interventions for their influence on the reproducibility and replicability of research will be selected, including those studies additionally investigating drivers and barriers to the implementation and effectiveness of interventions. Studies will first be selected by title and abstract (if available), semi-automated, and then by reading the full text by at least two independent reviewers. We will analyze existing scientific evidence using scoping review and evidence gap mapping methodologies. Results The results will be presented in interactive evidence maps, summarized in a narrative synthesis, and serve as input for subsequent research. Review registration This protocol has been pre-registered on OSF under doi https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/D65YS
AB - Background Many interventions, especially those linked to open science, have been proposed to combat the reproducibility crisis. To what extent these propositions are based on scientific evidence from empirical evaluations is not clear. Aims The primary objective is to identify interventions that have been formally investigated regarding their influence on reproducibility and replicability. A secondary objective is to list any facilitators or barriers reported and to identify gaps in the evidence. Methods We will search broadly by using electronic bibliographic databases, broad internet search, and contacting experts in the field of reproducibility, replicability, and open science. Any study investigating interventions for their influence on the reproducibility and replicability of research will be selected, including those studies additionally investigating drivers and barriers to the implementation and effectiveness of interventions. Studies will first be selected by title and abstract (if available), semi-automated, and then by reading the full text by at least two independent reviewers. We will analyze existing scientific evidence using scoping review and evidence gap mapping methodologies. Results The results will be presented in interactive evidence maps, summarized in a narrative synthesis, and serve as input for subsequent research. Review registration This protocol has been pre-registered on OSF under doi https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/D65YS
KW - Reproducibility
U2 - 10.12688/openreseurope.16567.1
DO - 10.12688/openreseurope.16567.1
M3 - Article
SN - 2732-5121
VL - 3
JO - Open Research Europe
JF - Open Research Europe
M1 - 179
ER -