Protocol transparency is vital for Registered Reports

Christopher D Chambers and David Thomas Mellor
Additional contact information
Christopher D Chambers: Cardiff University
David Thomas Mellor: Center for Open Science

No xdjnu, OSF Preprints from Center for Open Science

Abstract: To the Editor - We welcome Hardwicke and Ioannidis’ (H&I) timely evaluation of the Registered Reports (RR) article type,1 now offered at over 120 journals across the life and social sciences (https://cos.io/rr/). H&I identify two main shortcomings of RRs: lack of protocol transparency and lack of standardised protocol registration. Both are important issues. Protocol transparency is essential for enabling readers to compare time-stamped, accepted Stage 1 protocols with the Introduction and Methods of published Stage 2 articles. Standardisation of registration helps ensure that published protocols are comprehensible and verifiable. For example, work such as the COMPare campaign is only possible because of the transparency afforded by consistently registered clinical trials.2 Here we report the steps we are taking to address these concerns.

Date: 2018-10-01
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://osf.io/download/5bb250726e78da0016322a1c/

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:osf:osfxxx:xdjnu

DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/xdjnu

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in OSF Preprints from Center for Open Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by OSF ().