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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mori, Yuki, Takashima, Kaito, Ueda, Kohei, Sasaki, Kyoshiro, Yamada, Yuki
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