An open investigation of the reproducibility of cancer biology research - PubMed (original) (raw)

An open investigation of the reproducibility of cancer biology research

Timothy M Errington et al. Elife. 2014.

Abstract

It is widely believed that research that builds upon previously published findings has reproduced the original work. However, it is rare for researchers to perform or publish direct replications of existing results. The Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology is an open investigation of reproducibility in preclinical cancer biology research. We have identified 50 high impact cancer biology articles published in the period 2010-2012, and plan to replicate a subset of experimental results from each article. A Registered Report detailing the proposed experimental designs and protocols for each subset of experiments will be peer reviewed and published prior to data collection. The results of these experiments will then be published in a Replication Study. The resulting open methodology and dataset will provide evidence about the reproducibility of high-impact results, and an opportunity to identify predictors of reproducibility.

Keywords: human; human biology; medicine; methodology; mouse; open science; replication; reproducibility; reproducibility project: cancer biology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

EI: Employed by and hold shares in Science Exchange Inc.

FET: Employed by and hold shares in Science Exchange Inc.

JL: Employed by and hold shares in Science Exchange Inc.

The other authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1.

Figure 1.. The Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology will replicate selected experiments from a set of 50 research papers in an effort to estimate the rate of reproducibility in preclinical cancer biology research.

DOI:

http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.04333.002

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Alberts B, Kirschner MW, Tilghman S, Varmus H. Rescuing US biomedical research from its systemic flaws. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of USA. 2014;111:5773–5777. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1404402111. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Asendorpf JB, Conner M, De Fruyt F, De Houwer J, Denissen JJ, Fiedler K, Fiedler S, Funder DC, Kliegl R, Nosek BA, Perugini M, Roberts BW, Schmitt M, van Aken MA, Weber H, Wicherts JM. Recommendations for increasing replicability in psychology. European Journal of Personality. 2013;27:108–119. doi: 10.1002/per.1919. - DOI
    1. Bacon R. Fr. Rogeri Bacon Opera quædam hactenus inedita. Vol. I. containing I.–Opus tertium. II.–Opus minus. III.–Compendium philosophiæ. Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts; 1267/1859. http://books.google.com/books?id=wMUKAAAAYAAJ Retrieved from.
    1. Begley CG, Ellis LM. Raise standards for preclinical cancer research. Nature. 2012;483:531–533. doi: 10.1038/483531a. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bissell M. The risks of the replication drive. Nature. 2013;503:333–334. doi: 10.1038/503333a. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms

Grants and funding

The Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology is funded by the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, provided to the Center for Open Science in collaboration with Science Exchange. The funder had no role in study design or the decision to submit the work for publication.

LinkOut - more resources