bioRxivScientific Communication & EducationPreprint
Accessibility and Reproducible Research Practices in Cardiovascular Literature
G. Heckerman, E. Tzng, A. Campos-Melendez, C. Ekwueme, A. Mueller
Abstract
BackgroundSeveral fields have described low reproducibility of scientific research and poor accessibility in research reporting practices. Although previous reports have investigated accessible reporting practices that lead to reproducible research in other fields, to date no study has explored the extent of accessible and reproducible research practices in cardiovascular science literature. MethodsTo study accessibility and reproducibility in cardiovascular research reporting, we screened 400 randomly selected articles published in 2019 in three top cardiovascular science publications: Circulation, the European Heart Journal, and the Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC). We screened each paper for accessible and reproducible research practices using a set of accessibility criteria including protocol, materials, data, and analysis script availability, as well as accessibility of the publication itself. We also quantified the consistency of open research practices within and across cardiovascular study types and journal formats. ResultsWe identified that fewer than 2% of cardiovascular research publications provide sufficient resources (materials, methods, data, and analysis scripts) to fully reproduce their studies. After calculating an accessibility score as a measure of the extent to which an articles makes its resources available, we also showed that the level of accessibility varies across study types (p = 2e-16) and across journals (p = 5.9e-13). We further show that there are significant differences in which study types share which resources. We also describe the relationship between accessibility scores and corresponding author nationality. ConclusionAlthough the degree to which reproducible reporting practices are present in publications varies significantly across journals and study types; current cardiovascular science reports frequently do not provide sufficient materials, protocols, data, or analysis information to reproduce a study. In the future, having higher standards of accessibility mandated by either journals or funding bodies will help increase the reproducibility of cardiovascular research. FundingAuthors Gabriel Heckerman, Arely Campos-Melendez, and Chisomaga Ekwueme were supported by an NIH R25 grant from the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (R25HL147666). Eileen Tzng was supported by an AHA Institutional Training Award fellowship (18UFEL33960207).
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
- Funders' expectations for open science in cardiovascular research: A Scoping review of the largest cardiovascular research funders
Anna Catharina Vieira Armond, AlMamoune Alaoui, … Kelly Denise Cobey·Journal of the American Heart AssociationPeer-reviewed·May 6, 2026
- Evaluation of Reproducible and Transparent Research Practices in Sports Medicine Research: A Cross-sectional study
- Evaluating Study Design Rigor in Preclinical Cardiovascular Research: A Replication Study
Isaiah C. Jimenez, Gabrielle C. Montenegro, … Adrienne L. Mueller·bioRxiv·Jun 27, 2023
- Cardiology researchers' practices and perceived barriers related to open science: an international cross-sectional survey
K. D. Cobey, M. Alayche, … D. Moher·bioRxiv·Jun 29, 2023
- Biomedical researchers perspectives on the reproducibility of research: a cross-sectional international survey
K. D. Cobey, S. Ebrahimzadeh, … D. Moher·bioRxiv·Sep 18, 2023
- Reproducible and Transparent Research Practices in Published Neurology Research
S. L. Rauh, T. Torgerson, … M. Vassar·bioRxiv·Sep 26, 2019