SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Blind spots on western blots: Assessment of common problems in western blot figures and methods reporting with recommendations to improve them
11 references·0 citing·45 second hop
Blind spots on western blots: Assessment of common problems in western blot figures and methods reporting with recommendations to improve them (2022)Blind spots on western blots: Assessment …The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an…Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas (2021)Declaración PRISMA 2020: una …Automated screening of COVID-19 preprints: can we help authors to improve transparency and reproducibility? (2021)Automated screening of COVID-…The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2020)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an…Dimensions: Bringing down barriers between scientometricians and data (2020)Dimensions: Bringing down bar…Did a change in Nature journals’ editorial policy for life sciences research improve reporting? (2019)Did a change in Nature journa…Goals and practicalities of immunoblotting and immunohistochemistry: A guide for submission to the British Journal of Pharmacology (2018)Goals and practicalities of i…The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications (2016)The Prevalence of Inappropria…Transparency Is the Key to Quality (2015)Transparency Is the Key to Qu…The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies (2008)The Strengthening the Reporti…The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies (2007)The Strengthening the Reporti…Replicates and repeats—what is the difference and is it significant? (2012)Why we need to report more than 'Data were Analyzed by t-tests or ANOVA' (2018)Towards wide-scale adoption of open science practices: The role of open science communities (2021)Training early career researchers to use meta-research to improve science: A participant-guided “learn by doing” approach (2021)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science (2015)Prestigious Science Journals Struggle to Reach Even Average Reliability (2018)Demarcating spectrums of predatory publishing: Economic and institutional sources of academic legitimacy (2020)The entities enabling scientific fraud at scale are large, resilient, and growing rapidly (2025)Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement (1999)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups (2007)Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration (2007)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals (2006)Peer Review: A Flawed Process at the Heart of Science and Journals (2006)Believe it or not: how much can we rely on published data on potential drug targets? (2011)Limited engagement with transparent and open science standards in the policies of pain journals: a cross-sectional evaluation (2020)The Rigor and Transparency Index Quality Metric for Assessing Biological and Medical Science Methods (2020)The MDAR (Materials Design Analysis Reporting) Framework for transparent reporting in the life sciences (2021)Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): A New Metric That Uses Citation Rates to Measure Influence at the Article Level (2016)Dimensions: A competitor to Scopus and the Web of Science? (2018)Dimensions: Building Context for Search and Evaluation (2018)Exploring machine learning: a scientometrics approach using bibliometrix and VOSviewer (2022)Scopus 1900–2020: Growth in articles, abstracts, countries, fields, and journals (2022)SciSciNet: A large-scale open data lake for the science of science research (2023)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)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)Global prevalence and burden of depressive and anxiety disorders in 204 countries and territories in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic (2021)PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews (2021)PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews (2021)PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation (2018)Post-traumatic stress in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis (2022)Understanding Social Media Literacy: A Systematic Review of the Concept and Its Competences (2022)Effective leadership and communication strategies in disadvantaged contexts in the digital age (2023)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement (2015)RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2019)PRISMA2020 : An R package and Shiny app for producing PRISMA 2020‐compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and Open Synthesis (2022)Reporting guideline for overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions: development of the PRIOR statement (2022)A practical guide for transparent reporting of research on natural products in the British Journal of Pharmacology: Reproducibility of natural product research (2020)Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement (2015)Assessing the quality of studies in meta-analyses: Advantages and limitations of the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (2017)Physical, psychological and occupational consequences of job burnout: A systematic review of prospective studies (2017)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2021The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews107,380 cited
  • 2007The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies22,917 cited
  • 2008The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies17,743 cited
  • 2020The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews5,174 cited
  • 2021Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas1,309 cited
  • 2018Goals and practicalities of immunoblotting and immunohistochemistry: A guide for submission to the British Journal of Pharmacology894 cited
  • 2016The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications287 cited
  • 2020Dimensions: Bringing down barriers between scientometricians and data218 cited
  • 2015Transparency Is the Key to Quality114 cited
  • 2019Did a change in Nature journals’ editorial policy for life sciences research improve reporting?101 cited
  • 2021Automated screening of COVID-19 preprints: can we help authors to improve transparency and reproducibility?57 cited

Cited by

No citing works inside the corpus for this window.

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