Cargando…
Evaluating implementation of the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines: the TRUST process for rating journal policies, procedures, and practices
BACKGROUND: The Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines describe modular standards that journals can adopt to promote open science. The TOP Factor is a metric to describe the extent to which journals have adopted the TOP Guidelines in their policies. Systematic methods and rating instru...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8173977/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34078479 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41073-021-00112-8 |
_version_ | 1783702818016722944 |
---|---|
author | Mayo-Wilson, Evan Grant, Sean Supplee, Lauren Kianersi, Sina Amin, Afsah DeHaven, Alex Mellor, David |
author_facet | Mayo-Wilson, Evan Grant, Sean Supplee, Lauren Kianersi, Sina Amin, Afsah DeHaven, Alex Mellor, David |
author_sort | Mayo-Wilson, Evan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines describe modular standards that journals can adopt to promote open science. The TOP Factor is a metric to describe the extent to which journals have adopted the TOP Guidelines in their policies. Systematic methods and rating instruments are needed to calculate the TOP Factor. Moreover, implementation of these open science policies depends on journal procedures and practices, for which TOP provides no standards or rating instruments. METHODS: We describe a process for assessing journal policies, procedures, and practices according to the TOP Guidelines. We developed this process as part of the Transparency of Research Underpinning Social Intervention Tiers (TRUST) Initiative to advance open science in the social intervention research ecosystem. We also provide new instruments for rating journal instructions to authors (policies), manuscript submission systems (procedures), and published articles (practices) according to standards in the TOP Guidelines. In addition, we describe how to determine the TOP Factor score for a journal, calculate reliability of journal ratings, and assess coherence among a journal’s policies, procedures, and practices. As a demonstration of this process, we describe a protocol for studying approximately 345 influential journals that have published research used to inform evidence-based policy. DISCUSSION: The TRUST Process includes systematic methods and rating instruments for assessing and facilitating implementation of the TOP Guidelines by journals across disciplines. Our study of journals publishing influential social intervention research will provide a comprehensive account of whether these journals have policies, procedures, and practices that are consistent with standards for open science and thereby facilitate the publication of trustworthy findings to inform evidence-based policy. Through this demonstration, we expect to identify ways to refine the TOP Guidelines and the TOP Factor. Refinements could include: improving templates for adoption in journal instructions to authors, manuscript submission systems, and published articles; revising explanatory guidance intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the TOP Guidelines; and clarifying the distinctions among different levels of implementation. Research materials are available on the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/txyr3/. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41073-021-00112-8. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8173977 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81739772021-06-03 Evaluating implementation of the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines: the TRUST process for rating journal policies, procedures, and practices Mayo-Wilson, Evan Grant, Sean Supplee, Lauren Kianersi, Sina Amin, Afsah DeHaven, Alex Mellor, David Res Integr Peer Rev Study Protocol BACKGROUND: The Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines describe modular standards that journals can adopt to promote open science. The TOP Factor is a metric to describe the extent to which journals have adopted the TOP Guidelines in their policies. Systematic methods and rating instruments are needed to calculate the TOP Factor. Moreover, implementation of these open science policies depends on journal procedures and practices, for which TOP provides no standards or rating instruments. METHODS: We describe a process for assessing journal policies, procedures, and practices according to the TOP Guidelines. We developed this process as part of the Transparency of Research Underpinning Social Intervention Tiers (TRUST) Initiative to advance open science in the social intervention research ecosystem. We also provide new instruments for rating journal instructions to authors (policies), manuscript submission systems (procedures), and published articles (practices) according to standards in the TOP Guidelines. In addition, we describe how to determine the TOP Factor score for a journal, calculate reliability of journal ratings, and assess coherence among a journal’s policies, procedures, and practices. As a demonstration of this process, we describe a protocol for studying approximately 345 influential journals that have published research used to inform evidence-based policy. DISCUSSION: The TRUST Process includes systematic methods and rating instruments for assessing and facilitating implementation of the TOP Guidelines by journals across disciplines. Our study of journals publishing influential social intervention research will provide a comprehensive account of whether these journals have policies, procedures, and practices that are consistent with standards for open science and thereby facilitate the publication of trustworthy findings to inform evidence-based policy. Through this demonstration, we expect to identify ways to refine the TOP Guidelines and the TOP Factor. Refinements could include: improving templates for adoption in journal instructions to authors, manuscript submission systems, and published articles; revising explanatory guidance intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the TOP Guidelines; and clarifying the distinctions among different levels of implementation. Research materials are available on the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/txyr3/. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41073-021-00112-8. BioMed Central 2021-06-02 /pmc/articles/PMC8173977/ /pubmed/34078479 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41073-021-00112-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Study Protocol Mayo-Wilson, Evan Grant, Sean Supplee, Lauren Kianersi, Sina Amin, Afsah DeHaven, Alex Mellor, David Evaluating implementation of the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines: the TRUST process for rating journal policies, procedures, and practices |
title | Evaluating implementation of the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines: the TRUST process for rating journal policies, procedures, and practices |
title_full | Evaluating implementation of the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines: the TRUST process for rating journal policies, procedures, and practices |
title_fullStr | Evaluating implementation of the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines: the TRUST process for rating journal policies, procedures, and practices |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating implementation of the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines: the TRUST process for rating journal policies, procedures, and practices |
title_short | Evaluating implementation of the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines: the TRUST process for rating journal policies, procedures, and practices |
title_sort | evaluating implementation of the transparency and openness promotion (top) guidelines: the trust process for rating journal policies, procedures, and practices |
topic | Study Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8173977/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34078479 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41073-021-00112-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mayowilsonevan evaluatingimplementationofthetransparencyandopennesspromotiontopguidelinesthetrustprocessforratingjournalpoliciesproceduresandpractices AT grantsean evaluatingimplementationofthetransparencyandopennesspromotiontopguidelinesthetrustprocessforratingjournalpoliciesproceduresandpractices AT suppleelauren evaluatingimplementationofthetransparencyandopennesspromotiontopguidelinesthetrustprocessforratingjournalpoliciesproceduresandpractices AT kianersisina evaluatingimplementationofthetransparencyandopennesspromotiontopguidelinesthetrustprocessforratingjournalpoliciesproceduresandpractices AT aminafsah evaluatingimplementationofthetransparencyandopennesspromotiontopguidelinesthetrustprocessforratingjournalpoliciesproceduresandpractices AT dehavenalex evaluatingimplementationofthetransparencyandopennesspromotiontopguidelinesthetrustprocessforratingjournalpoliciesproceduresandpractices AT mellordavid evaluatingimplementationofthetransparencyandopennesspromotiontopguidelinesthetrustprocessforratingjournalpoliciesproceduresandpractices |