Cargando…

Assessing Markers of Reproducibility and Transparency in Smoking Behaviour Change Intervention Evaluations

INTRODUCTION: Activities promoting research reproducibility and transparency are crucial for generating trustworthy evidence. Evaluation of smoking interventions is one area where vested interests may motivate reduced reproducibility and transparency. AIMS: Assess markers of transparency and reprodu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Norris, Emma, He, Yiwei, Loh, Rachel, West, Robert, Michie, Susan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8279208/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34306236
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/6694386
_version_ 1783722410448519168
author Norris, Emma
He, Yiwei
Loh, Rachel
West, Robert
Michie, Susan
author_facet Norris, Emma
He, Yiwei
Loh, Rachel
West, Robert
Michie, Susan
author_sort Norris, Emma
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Activities promoting research reproducibility and transparency are crucial for generating trustworthy evidence. Evaluation of smoking interventions is one area where vested interests may motivate reduced reproducibility and transparency. AIMS: Assess markers of transparency and reproducibility in smoking behaviour change intervention evaluation reports. METHODS: One hundred evaluation reports of smoking behaviour change intervention randomised controlled trials published in 2018-2019 were identified. Reproducibility markers of pre-registration; protocol sharing; data, material, and analysis script sharing; replication of a previous study; and open access publication were coded in identified reports. Transparency markers of funding and conflict of interest declarations were also coded. Coding was performed by two researchers, with inter-rater reliability calculated using Krippendorff's alpha. RESULTS: Seventy-one percent of reports were open access, and 73% were pre-registered. However, there are only 13% provided accessible materials, 7% accessible data, and 1% accessible analysis scripts. No reports were replication studies. Ninety-four percent of reports provided a funding source statement, and eighty-eight percent of reports provided a conflict of interest statement. CONCLUSIONS: Open data, materials, analysis, and replications are rare in smoking behaviour change interventions, whereas funding source and conflict of interest declarations are common. Future smoking research should be more reproducible to enable knowledge accumulation. This study was pre-registered: https://osf.io/yqj5p.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8279208
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82792082021-07-23 Assessing Markers of Reproducibility and Transparency in Smoking Behaviour Change Intervention Evaluations Norris, Emma He, Yiwei Loh, Rachel West, Robert Michie, Susan J Smok Cessat Research Article INTRODUCTION: Activities promoting research reproducibility and transparency are crucial for generating trustworthy evidence. Evaluation of smoking interventions is one area where vested interests may motivate reduced reproducibility and transparency. AIMS: Assess markers of transparency and reproducibility in smoking behaviour change intervention evaluation reports. METHODS: One hundred evaluation reports of smoking behaviour change intervention randomised controlled trials published in 2018-2019 were identified. Reproducibility markers of pre-registration; protocol sharing; data, material, and analysis script sharing; replication of a previous study; and open access publication were coded in identified reports. Transparency markers of funding and conflict of interest declarations were also coded. Coding was performed by two researchers, with inter-rater reliability calculated using Krippendorff's alpha. RESULTS: Seventy-one percent of reports were open access, and 73% were pre-registered. However, there are only 13% provided accessible materials, 7% accessible data, and 1% accessible analysis scripts. No reports were replication studies. Ninety-four percent of reports provided a funding source statement, and eighty-eight percent of reports provided a conflict of interest statement. CONCLUSIONS: Open data, materials, analysis, and replications are rare in smoking behaviour change interventions, whereas funding source and conflict of interest declarations are common. Future smoking research should be more reproducible to enable knowledge accumulation. This study was pre-registered: https://osf.io/yqj5p. Hindawi 2021-01-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8279208/ /pubmed/34306236 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/6694386 Text en Copyright © 2021 Emma Norris et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Norris, Emma
He, Yiwei
Loh, Rachel
West, Robert
Michie, Susan
Assessing Markers of Reproducibility and Transparency in Smoking Behaviour Change Intervention Evaluations
title Assessing Markers of Reproducibility and Transparency in Smoking Behaviour Change Intervention Evaluations
title_full Assessing Markers of Reproducibility and Transparency in Smoking Behaviour Change Intervention Evaluations
title_fullStr Assessing Markers of Reproducibility and Transparency in Smoking Behaviour Change Intervention Evaluations
title_full_unstemmed Assessing Markers of Reproducibility and Transparency in Smoking Behaviour Change Intervention Evaluations
title_short Assessing Markers of Reproducibility and Transparency in Smoking Behaviour Change Intervention Evaluations
title_sort assessing markers of reproducibility and transparency in smoking behaviour change intervention evaluations
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8279208/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34306236
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/6694386
work_keys_str_mv AT norrisemma assessingmarkersofreproducibilityandtransparencyinsmokingbehaviourchangeinterventionevaluations
AT heyiwei assessingmarkersofreproducibilityandtransparencyinsmokingbehaviourchangeinterventionevaluations
AT lohrachel assessingmarkersofreproducibilityandtransparencyinsmokingbehaviourchangeinterventionevaluations
AT westrobert assessingmarkersofreproducibilityandtransparencyinsmokingbehaviourchangeinterventionevaluations
AT michiesusan assessingmarkersofreproducibilityandtransparencyinsmokingbehaviourchangeinterventionevaluations