Cargando…
Quality Output Checklist and Content Assessment (QuOCCA): a new tool for assessing research quality and reproducibility
Research must be well designed, properly conducted and clearly and transparently reported. Our independent medical research institute wanted a simple, generic tool to assess the quality of the research conducted by its researchers, with the goal of identifying areas that could be improved through ta...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9516158/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36167369 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-060976 |
_version_ | 1784798648444387328 |
---|---|
author | Héroux, Martin E Butler, Annie A Cashin, Aidan G McCaughey, Euan J Affleck, Andrew J Green, Michael A Cartwright, Andrew Jones, Matthew Kiely, Kim M van Schooten, Kimberley S Menant, Jasmine C Wewege, Michael Gandevia, Simon C |
author_facet | Héroux, Martin E Butler, Annie A Cashin, Aidan G McCaughey, Euan J Affleck, Andrew J Green, Michael A Cartwright, Andrew Jones, Matthew Kiely, Kim M van Schooten, Kimberley S Menant, Jasmine C Wewege, Michael Gandevia, Simon C |
author_sort | Héroux, Martin E |
collection | PubMed |
description | Research must be well designed, properly conducted and clearly and transparently reported. Our independent medical research institute wanted a simple, generic tool to assess the quality of the research conducted by its researchers, with the goal of identifying areas that could be improved through targeted educational activities. Unfortunately, none was available, thus we devised our own. Here, we report development of the Quality Output Checklist and Content Assessment (QuOCCA), and its application to publications from our institute’s scientists. Following consensus meetings and external review by statistical and methodological experts, 11 items were selected for the final version of the QuOCCA: research transparency (items 1–3), research design and analysis (items 4–6) and research reporting practices (items 7–11). Five pairs of raters assessed all 231 articles published in 2017 and 221 in 2018 by researchers at our institute. Overall, the results were similar between years and revealed limited engagement with several recommended practices highlighted in the QuOCCA. These results will be useful to guide educational initiatives and their effectiveness. The QuOCCA is brief and focuses on broadly applicable and relevant concepts to open, high-quality, reproducible and well-reported science. Thus, the QuOCCA could be used by other biomedical institutions and individual researchers to evaluate research publications, assess changes in research practice over time and guide the discussion about high-quality, open science. Given its generic nature, the QuOCCA may also be useful in other research disciplines. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9516158 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95161582022-09-29 Quality Output Checklist and Content Assessment (QuOCCA): a new tool for assessing research quality and reproducibility Héroux, Martin E Butler, Annie A Cashin, Aidan G McCaughey, Euan J Affleck, Andrew J Green, Michael A Cartwright, Andrew Jones, Matthew Kiely, Kim M van Schooten, Kimberley S Menant, Jasmine C Wewege, Michael Gandevia, Simon C BMJ Open Communication Research must be well designed, properly conducted and clearly and transparently reported. Our independent medical research institute wanted a simple, generic tool to assess the quality of the research conducted by its researchers, with the goal of identifying areas that could be improved through targeted educational activities. Unfortunately, none was available, thus we devised our own. Here, we report development of the Quality Output Checklist and Content Assessment (QuOCCA), and its application to publications from our institute’s scientists. Following consensus meetings and external review by statistical and methodological experts, 11 items were selected for the final version of the QuOCCA: research transparency (items 1–3), research design and analysis (items 4–6) and research reporting practices (items 7–11). Five pairs of raters assessed all 231 articles published in 2017 and 221 in 2018 by researchers at our institute. Overall, the results were similar between years and revealed limited engagement with several recommended practices highlighted in the QuOCCA. These results will be useful to guide educational initiatives and their effectiveness. The QuOCCA is brief and focuses on broadly applicable and relevant concepts to open, high-quality, reproducible and well-reported science. Thus, the QuOCCA could be used by other biomedical institutions and individual researchers to evaluate research publications, assess changes in research practice over time and guide the discussion about high-quality, open science. Given its generic nature, the QuOCCA may also be useful in other research disciplines. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-09-26 /pmc/articles/PMC9516158/ /pubmed/36167369 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-060976 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Communication Héroux, Martin E Butler, Annie A Cashin, Aidan G McCaughey, Euan J Affleck, Andrew J Green, Michael A Cartwright, Andrew Jones, Matthew Kiely, Kim M van Schooten, Kimberley S Menant, Jasmine C Wewege, Michael Gandevia, Simon C Quality Output Checklist and Content Assessment (QuOCCA): a new tool for assessing research quality and reproducibility |
title | Quality Output Checklist and Content Assessment (QuOCCA): a new tool for assessing research quality and reproducibility |
title_full | Quality Output Checklist and Content Assessment (QuOCCA): a new tool for assessing research quality and reproducibility |
title_fullStr | Quality Output Checklist and Content Assessment (QuOCCA): a new tool for assessing research quality and reproducibility |
title_full_unstemmed | Quality Output Checklist and Content Assessment (QuOCCA): a new tool for assessing research quality and reproducibility |
title_short | Quality Output Checklist and Content Assessment (QuOCCA): a new tool for assessing research quality and reproducibility |
title_sort | quality output checklist and content assessment (quocca): a new tool for assessing research quality and reproducibility |
topic | Communication |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9516158/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36167369 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-060976 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT herouxmartine qualityoutputchecklistandcontentassessmentquoccaanewtoolforassessingresearchqualityandreproducibility AT butleranniea qualityoutputchecklistandcontentassessmentquoccaanewtoolforassessingresearchqualityandreproducibility AT cashinaidang qualityoutputchecklistandcontentassessmentquoccaanewtoolforassessingresearchqualityandreproducibility AT mccaugheyeuanj qualityoutputchecklistandcontentassessmentquoccaanewtoolforassessingresearchqualityandreproducibility AT affleckandrewj qualityoutputchecklistandcontentassessmentquoccaanewtoolforassessingresearchqualityandreproducibility AT greenmichaela qualityoutputchecklistandcontentassessmentquoccaanewtoolforassessingresearchqualityandreproducibility AT cartwrightandrew qualityoutputchecklistandcontentassessmentquoccaanewtoolforassessingresearchqualityandreproducibility AT jonesmatthew qualityoutputchecklistandcontentassessmentquoccaanewtoolforassessingresearchqualityandreproducibility AT kielykimm qualityoutputchecklistandcontentassessmentquoccaanewtoolforassessingresearchqualityandreproducibility AT vanschootenkimberleys qualityoutputchecklistandcontentassessmentquoccaanewtoolforassessingresearchqualityandreproducibility AT menantjasminec qualityoutputchecklistandcontentassessmentquoccaanewtoolforassessingresearchqualityandreproducibility AT wewegemichael qualityoutputchecklistandcontentassessmentquoccaanewtoolforassessingresearchqualityandreproducibility AT gandeviasimonc qualityoutputchecklistandcontentassessmentquoccaanewtoolforassessingresearchqualityandreproducibility |