ArticleScience editor : a publication of the Council of Science Editors2023
Assessing the Effectiveness of SciScore in Supporting the Reproducibility of Scientific Research.
Article in Science editor : a publication of the Council of Science Editors, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Open Science Policies and Practices Among Medical Journals.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Using Generative AI to Appraise the Quality of Medical Education Research Studies: Agreement Between AI-Generated and Human MERSQI Scores.AEM education and training · 2026Article
- Misidentified cell lines: failures of peer review, varying journal responses to misidentification inquiries, and strategies for safeguarding biomedical research.Research integrity and peer review · 2025Article
- A scoping review on metrics to quantify reproducibility: a multitude of questions leads to a multitude of metrics.Royal Society open science · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
It is critical for researchers and grantees alike to adhere to rigor and transparency criteria to ensure their contributions to scientific research are sufficiently transparent so they can be replicated and eventually reproduced. SciScore evaluates scientific manuscripts for compliance with consensus granting agency and journal recommendations designed to address different aspects of rigor and transparency in the published literature (e.g., MDAR [Materials Design Analysis Reporting], ARRIVE [Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments], CONSORT [Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials], RRID [Research Resource Identification] standards). SciScore has been implemented by several society publishers in different ways, with one allowing authors to run the tool as often as they wish, and another having editors verify manuscripts using the report provided by the tool. Results show that the use of the tool led to an increase in the average SciScore over time or via the revision process. The use of the tool also resulted in an increase in the number of manuscripts with RRIDs, a fairly easy transparency criterion to check. We conclude that the use of the tool is effective in improving some aspects of rigor of research articles.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.