bioRxivScientific Communication & EducationPreprint
Evaluation of Reproducibility in Urology Publications
Abstract
Take Home MessageMany components of transparency and reproducibility are lacking in urology publications, making study replication, at best, difficult.\n\nIntroductionReproducibility is essential for the integrity of scientific research. Reproducibility is measured by the ability of investigators to replicate the outcomes of an original publication by using the same materials and procedures.\n\nMethodsWe sampled 300 publications in the field of urology for assessment of multiple indicators of reproducibility, including material availability, raw data availability, analysis script availability, pre-registration information, links to protocols, and whether the publication was freely available to the public. Publications were also assessed for statements about conflicts of interest and funding sources.\n\nResultsOf the 300 sample publications, 171 contained empirical data and could be analyzed for reproducibility. Of the analyzed articles, 0.58% (1/171) provided links to protocols, and none of the studies provided analysis scripts. Additionally, 95.91% (164/171) did not provide accessible raw data, 97.53% (158/162) did not provide accessible materials, and 95.32% (163/171) did not state they were pre-registered.\n\nConclusionCurrent urology research does not consistently provide the components needed to reproduce original studies. Collaborative efforts from investigators and journal editors are needed to improve research quality, while minimizing waste and patient risk.
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Can Orthopaedics become the Gold Standard for Reproducibility? A Roadmap to Success
I. A. Fladie, S. Evans, … B. M. Vassar·bioRxiv·Jul 30, 2019
- Transparent and Reproducible Research Practices in the Surgical Literature
T. Hughes, A. Niemann, … M. Vassar·bioRxiv·Oct 7, 2019
- An evaluation of Nephrology Literature for Transparency and Reproducibility Indicators: Cross-sectional Review
Ian A. Fladie, Mopileola Tomi Adewumi, … Matt B. Vassar·Kidney International ReportsPeer-reviewed·Nov 13, 2019
- Evaluation of Reproducible and Transparent Research Practices in Sports Medicine Research: A Cross-sectional study
- Evaluation of Reproducible and Transparent Research Practices in Pulmonology
- Assessing the statistical reporting quality in high-impact factor urology journals
ShuangYang Dai, Hong Wei Xu, … Xiaobin Zhou·bioRxiv·Mar 19, 2020