Cargando…
Trinity review: integrating Registered Reports with research ethics and funding reviews
One major source of exhaustion for researchers is the redundant paperwork of three different documents—research papers, ethics review applications, and research grant applications—for the same research plan. This is a wasteful and redundant process for researchers, and it has a more direct impact on...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9118676/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35590337 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-022-06043-x |
_version_ | 1784710549021392896 |
---|---|
author | Mori, Yuki Takashima, Kaito Ueda, Kohei Sasaki, Kyoshiro Yamada, Yuki |
author_facet | Mori, Yuki Takashima, Kaito Ueda, Kohei Sasaki, Kyoshiro Yamada, Yuki |
author_sort | Mori, Yuki |
collection | PubMed |
description | One major source of exhaustion for researchers is the redundant paperwork of three different documents—research papers, ethics review applications, and research grant applications—for the same research plan. This is a wasteful and redundant process for researchers, and it has a more direct impact on the career development of early-career researchers. Here, we propose a trinity review system based on Registered Reports that integrates scientific, ethics, and research funding reviews. In our proposed trinity review system, scientific and ethics reviews are undertaken concurrently for a research protocol before running the study. After the protocol is approved in principle through these review processes, a funding review will take place, and the researchers will begin their research. Following the experiments or surveys, the scientific review will be conducted on a completed version of the paper again, including the results and discussions (i.e., the full paper), and the full paper will be published once it has passed the second review. This paper provides the brief process of the trinity review system and discusses the need for and benefits of the proposed system. Although the trinity review system only applies to a few appropriate disciplines, it helps improve reproducibility and integrity. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9118676 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-91186762022-05-20 Trinity review: integrating Registered Reports with research ethics and funding reviews Mori, Yuki Takashima, Kaito Ueda, Kohei Sasaki, Kyoshiro Yamada, Yuki BMC Res Notes Commentary One major source of exhaustion for researchers is the redundant paperwork of three different documents—research papers, ethics review applications, and research grant applications—for the same research plan. This is a wasteful and redundant process for researchers, and it has a more direct impact on the career development of early-career researchers. Here, we propose a trinity review system based on Registered Reports that integrates scientific, ethics, and research funding reviews. In our proposed trinity review system, scientific and ethics reviews are undertaken concurrently for a research protocol before running the study. After the protocol is approved in principle through these review processes, a funding review will take place, and the researchers will begin their research. Following the experiments or surveys, the scientific review will be conducted on a completed version of the paper again, including the results and discussions (i.e., the full paper), and the full paper will be published once it has passed the second review. This paper provides the brief process of the trinity review system and discusses the need for and benefits of the proposed system. Although the trinity review system only applies to a few appropriate disciplines, it helps improve reproducibility and integrity. BioMed Central 2022-05-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9118676/ /pubmed/35590337 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-022-06043-x Text en © The Author(s) 2022 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 | Commentary Mori, Yuki Takashima, Kaito Ueda, Kohei Sasaki, Kyoshiro Yamada, Yuki Trinity review: integrating Registered Reports with research ethics and funding reviews |
title | Trinity review: integrating Registered Reports with research ethics and funding reviews |
title_full | Trinity review: integrating Registered Reports with research ethics and funding reviews |
title_fullStr | Trinity review: integrating Registered Reports with research ethics and funding reviews |
title_full_unstemmed | Trinity review: integrating Registered Reports with research ethics and funding reviews |
title_short | Trinity review: integrating Registered Reports with research ethics and funding reviews |
title_sort | trinity review: integrating registered reports with research ethics and funding reviews |
topic | Commentary |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9118676/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35590337 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-022-06043-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT moriyuki trinityreviewintegratingregisteredreportswithresearchethicsandfundingreviews AT takashimakaito trinityreviewintegratingregisteredreportswithresearchethicsandfundingreviews AT uedakohei trinityreviewintegratingregisteredreportswithresearchethicsandfundingreviews AT sasakikyoshiro trinityreviewintegratingregisteredreportswithresearchethicsandfundingreviews AT yamadayuki trinityreviewintegratingregisteredreportswithresearchethicsandfundingreviews |