Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medicine 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Editorial

Increasing the evidence base in journalology: creating an international best practice journal research network

Authors: David Moher, Philippe Ravaud

Published in: BMC Medicine | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Biomedical journals continue to be the single most important conduit for disseminating biomedical knowledge. Unlike clinical medicine, where evidence is considered fundamental to practice, journals still operate largely in a ‘black box’ mode without sufficient evidence to drive their practice. We believe there is an immediate need to substantially increase the amount and quality of research by journals to ensure their practice is as evidence based as possible. To achieve this goal, we are proposing the development of an international ‘best practice journal research network’. We invite journals and others to join the network. Such a network is likely to improve the quality of journals. It is also likely to address many unanswered questions in publication science, including peer review, which can provide robust and generalizable answers.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Open Science Collaboration. PSYCHOLOGY. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science. 2015;349(6251):aac4716.CrossRef Open Science Collaboration. PSYCHOLOGY. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science. 2015;349(6251):aac4716.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Macleod MR, Lawson MA, Kyriakopoulou A, et al. Risk of bias in reports of in vivo research: a focus for improvement. PLoS Biology. 2015;13(10):e1002273.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Macleod MR, Lawson MA, Kyriakopoulou A, et al. Risk of bias in reports of in vivo research: a focus for improvement. PLoS Biology. 2015;13(10):e1002273.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Dwan K, Altman DG, Clarke M, et al. Evidence for the selective reporting of analyses and discrepancies in clinical trials: a systematic review of cohort studies of clinical trials. PLoS Medicine. 2014;11(6):e1001666.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Dwan K, Altman DG, Clarke M, et al. Evidence for the selective reporting of analyses and discrepancies in clinical trials: a systematic review of cohort studies of clinical trials. PLoS Medicine. 2014;11(6):e1001666.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Page MJ, Shamseer L, Altman DG, et al. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews of biomedical research: a cross-sectional study. PLoS Medicine. 2016;13(5):e1002028.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Page MJ, Shamseer L, Altman DG, et al. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews of biomedical research: a cross-sectional study. PLoS Medicine. 2016;13(5):e1002028.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
7.
go back to reference Cobo E, Cortes J, Ribera JM, et al. Effect of using reporting guidelines during peer review on quality of final manuscripts submitted to a biomedical journal: masked randomised trial. BMJ. 2011;343:d6783.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Cobo E, Cortes J, Ribera JM, et al. Effect of using reporting guidelines during peer review on quality of final manuscripts submitted to a biomedical journal: masked randomised trial. BMJ. 2011;343:d6783.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman DG, et al. Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;11:MR000030.PubMed Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman DG, et al. Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;11:MR000030.PubMed
9.
go back to reference Galipeau J, Moher D, Campbell C, et al. A systematic review highlights a knowledge gap regarding the effectiveness of health-related training programs in journalology. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2015;68(3):257–65.CrossRefPubMed Galipeau J, Moher D, Campbell C, et al. A systematic review highlights a knowledge gap regarding the effectiveness of health-related training programs in journalology. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2015;68(3):257–65.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Garfield E, Stephen P. Lock on “Journalology”. Curr Comment. 1990;3:19–24. Garfield E, Stephen P. Lock on “Journalology”. Curr Comment. 1990;3:19–24.
12.
go back to reference Rennie D, Flanagin A, Godlee F, et al. Eighth international congress on peer review in biomedical publication. BMJ. 2015;350:h2411.CrossRefPubMed Rennie D, Flanagin A, Godlee F, et al. Eighth international congress on peer review in biomedical publication. BMJ. 2015;350:h2411.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference van Rooyen S. A critical examination of the peer review process. Learned Publish. 1998;11(3):185–91.CrossRef van Rooyen S. A critical examination of the peer review process. Learned Publish. 1998;11(3):185–91.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Malicki M, von Elm E, Marusic A. Study design, publication outcome, and funding of research presented at international congresses on peer review and biomedical publication. JAMA. 2014;311(10):1065–7.CrossRefPubMed Malicki M, von Elm E, Marusic A. Study design, publication outcome, and funding of research presented at international congresses on peer review and biomedical publication. JAMA. 2014;311(10):1065–7.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Lannon CM, Peterson LE. Pediatric collaborative networks for quality improvement and research. Academic Pediatrics. 2013;13(6 Suppl):S69–74.CrossRefPubMed Lannon CM, Peterson LE. Pediatric collaborative networks for quality improvement and research. Academic Pediatrics. 2013;13(6 Suppl):S69–74.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Bruce R, Chauvin A, Trinquart L, Ravaud P, Boutron I. Impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review of biomedical journals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Medicine. 2016;14:85.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bruce R, Chauvin A, Trinquart L, Ravaud P, Boutron I. Impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review of biomedical journals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Medicine. 2016;14:85.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
20.
go back to reference Taichman DB, Backus J, Baethge C, et al. Sharing clinical trial data: a proposal from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. PLoS Medicine. 2016;13(1):e1001950.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Taichman DB, Backus J, Baethge C, et al. Sharing clinical trial data: a proposal from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. PLoS Medicine. 2016;13(1):e1001950.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
go back to reference Owen R, Macnaghten P, Stilgoe J. Responsible research and innovation: from science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy. 2012;39:751–60.CrossRef Owen R, Macnaghten P, Stilgoe J. Responsible research and innovation: from science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy. 2012;39:751–60.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Increasing the evidence base in journalology: creating an international best practice journal research network
Authors
David Moher
Philippe Ravaud
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medicine / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1741-7015
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-016-0707-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Medicine 1/2016 Go to the issue