SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Reality check on reproducibility
0 references·16 citing·46 second hop
Reality check on reproducibility (2016)Reality check on reproducibilityImproving energy research practices: guidance for transparency, reproducibility and quality (2021)Improving energy research pra…Unifying package managers, workflow engines, and containers: Computational reproducibility with BioNix (2020)Unifying package managers, wo…Evolving Outsourcing Landscape in Pharma R&D: Different Collaborative Models and Factors To Consider When Choosing a Contract Research Organization (2020)Evolving Outsourcing Landscap…Open laboratory notebooks: good for science, good for society, good for scientists (2019)Open laboratory notebooks: go…Matlab/R workflows to assess critical choices in Global Sensitivity Analysis using the SAFE toolbox (2019)Matlab/R workflows to assess …Improving the reproducibility of geospatial scientific workflows: the use of geosocial media in facilitating disaster response (2019)Improving the reproducibility…The search and selection for primary studies in systematic reviews published in dental journals indexed in MEDLINE was not fully reproducible (2018)The search and selection for …Reproducible research and GIScience: an evaluation using AGILE conference papers (2018)Reproducible research and GIS…Crisis or self-correction: Rethinking media narratives about the well-being of science (2018)Crisis or self-correction: Re…Automating Sciences: Philosophical and Social Dimensions (2018)Automating Sciences: Philosop…Towards Automating Data Narratives (2017)Towards Automating Data Narra…Scientists’ Conceptions of Good Research Practice (2017)Scientists’ Conceptions of Go…Rethinking the experiment: necessary (R)evolution (2017)Rethinking the experiment: ne…A systematic review of sample size and power in leading neuroscience journals (2017)A systematic review of sample…Reproducibility and Research Integrity (2016)Reproducibility and Research …Administrative social science data: The challenge of reproducible research (2016)Administrative social science…Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)The Logic of Scientific Discovery (2013)Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science (2015)Exploring the Gray Area: Similarities and Differences in Questionable Research Practices (QRPs) Across Main Areas of Research (2021)Strengthening research integrity: which topic areas should organisations focus on? (2021)Research Integrity: Where We Are and Where We Are Heading (2023)Reproducible Research in Computational Science (2011)The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) Statement (2015)Using mixed-method approaches to provide new insights into media coverage of femicide (2019)‘What about the dads?’ Linking fathers and children in administrative data: A systematic scoping review (2022)The design and realisation of the Virtual Research Environment for social sharing of workflows (2008)The case for open computer programs (2012)Jupyter Notebooks – a publishing format for reproducible computational workflows (2016)Indicators for the use of robotic labs in basic biomedical research: a literature analysis (2017)Perspectives on automated composition of workflows in the life sciences (2021)Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience (2013)1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility (2016)Reproducibility and Replicability in Geographical Analysis (2019)Practical Reproducibility in Geography and Geosciences (2020)Reproducibility and replicability: opportunities and challenges for geospatial research (2020)I.—COMPUTING MACHINERY AND INTELLIGENCE (1950)The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1963)The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1963)Data science for the scientific life cycle (2019)The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)Best-worst scaling identified adequate statistical methods and literature search as the most important items of AMSTAR2 (A measurement tool to assess systematic reviews) (2020)Development of an efficient search filter to retrieve systematic reviews from PubMed (2021)Methodological assessment and overall confidence in the results of systematic reviews with network meta‐analyses in Endodontics (2022)Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability (1973)Reproducibility of research: Issues and proposed remedies (2018)The Brazilian Reproducibility Initiative (2019)Reproducibility in the Social Sciences (2022)Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals (2006)Dealing with the positive publication bias: Why you should really publish your negative results (2017)Reproducible research practices, transparency, and open access data in the biomedical literature, 2015–2017 (2018)Transparent, Open, and Reproducible Prevention Science (2022)The use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings: A scoping review (2023)Open Access, Scholarly Communication, and Open Science in Psychology: An Overview for Researchers (2024)Factorial Sampling Plans for Preliminary Computational Experiments (1991)Making best use of model evaluations to compute sensitivity indices (2002)Global Sensitivity Analysis. The Primer (2007)A sensitivity analysis of the PAWN sensitivity index (2020)Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups (2007)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (2009)
this work references cited by second hop

References

No references inside the corpus for this window.

Cited by

  • 2016Reproducibility and Research Integrity124 cited
  • 2018Reproducible research and GIScience: an evaluation using AGILE conference papers109 cited
  • 2018Crisis or self-correction: Rethinking media narratives about the well-being of science64 cited
  • 2019Matlab/R workflows to assess critical choices in Global Sensitivity Analysis using the SAFE toolbox53 cited
  • 2018The search and selection for primary studies in systematic reviews published in dental journals indexed in MEDLINE was not fully reproducible49 cited
  • 2019Open laboratory notebooks: good for science, good for society, good for scientists45 cited
  • 2016Administrative social science data: The challenge of reproducible research43 cited
  • 2018Automating Sciences: Philosophical and Social Dimensions28 cited
  • 2021Improving energy research practices: guidance for transparency, reproducibility and quality28 cited
  • 2017Towards Automating Data Narratives23 cited
  • 2020Evolving Outsourcing Landscape in Pharma R&D: Different Collaborative Models and Factors To Consider When Choosing a Contract Research Organization18 cited
  • 2017Scientists’ Conceptions of Good Research Practice17 cited
  • 2019Improving the reproducibility of geospatial scientific workflows: the use of geosocial media in facilitating disaster response15 cited

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

  • 2017Rethinking the experiment: necessary (R)evolution15 cited
  • 2020Unifying package managers, workflow engines, and containers: Computational reproducibility with BioNix13 cited
  • 2017A systematic review of sample size and power in leading neuroscience journals9 cited