Search bioRxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/bioRxiv

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2022.12.08.519666

Taxonomy of interventions at academic institutions to improve research quality

Davidson, A. R.·Barbour, V.·Nakagawa, S.·Holcombe, A. O.·Fidler, F.·Glasziou, P. P.
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Research institutions and researchers have become increasingly concerned about poor research reproducibility and replicability, and research waste more broadly. Research institutions play an important role and understanding their intervention options is important. This review aims to identify and classify possible interventions to improve research quality, reduce waste, and improve reproducibility and replicability within research-performing institutions. Taxonomy development steps: 1) use of an exemplar paper of journal-level research quality improvement interventions, 2) 2-stage search in PubMed using seed and exemplar articles, and forward and backward citation searching to identify articles evaluating or describing research quality improvement, 3) elicited draft taxonomy feedback from researchers at an open-sciences conference workshop, and 4) cycles of revisions from the research team. The search identified 11 peer-reviewed articles on relevant interventions. Overall, 93 interventions were identified from peer-review literature and researcher reporting. Interventions covered before, during, and after study conduct research stages and whole of institution. Types of intervention included: Tools, Education & Training, Incentives, Modelling & Mentoring, Review & Feedback, Expert involvement, and Policies & Procedures. Identified areas for research institutions to focus on to improve research quality and for further research includes improving incentives to implement quality research practices, evaluating current interventions, encourage no- or low-cost/high-benefit interventions, examine institution research culture, and encourage mentor-mentee relationships.

Source connections

Explore related subjects

scientific communication and educationPreprint

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Davidson, A. R., Barbour, V., Nakagawa, S., Holcombe, A. O., Fidler, F., Glasziou, P. P.. 2022-12-10. Taxonomy of interventions at academic institutions to improve research quality. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.08.519666

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

bioRxiv2026

Evaluating Large Language Models as Tools to Navigate Researchers in Rapidly Evolving Research Landscapes: A Case Study in Cancer Drug Response Prediction

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising tools for assisting researchers in automating and accelerating the synthesis of literature reviews. However, their reliability is a significant concern due to issues like factual inaccuracies and hallucinations. The key question is whether LLMs can reliably provide comprehensive, up-to-date overviews and analyses. This study evaluates the performance of three leading LLMs (OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and DeepSeek) on the complex task of generating a comprehensive survey paper on deep learning for cancer Drug Response Prediction (DRP). By testing both standard and Deep Research (DR) / Deep Think (DT) modes of LLMs with prompts of varying detail, this paper assesses key academic dimensions, including reference management, content quality, and analytical depth. Key findings reveal that while DR modes of LLMs significantly improve reliability by eliminating hallucinations, performance variations exist across models and prompts. A trade-off between reference quantity and integration quality was observed, and even the best-performing models lacked the analytical depth of human experts, often requiring extensive human supervision. The study concludes that LLMs currently serve as powerful assistive tools but still cannot replace the critical validation and synthesis provided by human researchers. Choosing the best LLM to use depends on the task in hand, while several strategies can be implemented to improve the produced output.

scientific communication and education↗
bioRxiv2023

Enhancing Light-Sheet Fluorescence Microscopy Illumination Beams through Deep Design Optimization

Light sheet fluorescence microscopy (LSFM) provides the benefit of optical sectioning coupled with rapid acquisition times for imaging of tissue-cleared specimen. This allows for high-resolution 3D imaging of large tissue volumes. Inherently to LSFM, the quality of the imaging heavily relies on the characteristics of the illumination beam, with the notion that the illumination beam only illuminates a thin section that is being imaged. Therefore, substantial efforts are dedicated to identifying slender, non-diffracting beam profiles that can yield uniform and high-contrast images. An ongoing debate concerns the employment of the most optimal illumination beam; Gaussian, Bessel, Airy patterns and/or others. Comparisons among different beam profiles is challenging as their optimization objective is often different. Given that our large imaging datasets ([~]0.5TB images per sample) is already analyzed using deep learning models, we envisioned a different approach to this problem by hypothesizing that we can tailor the illumination beam to boost the deep learning models performance. We achieve this by integrating the physical LSFM illumination model after passing through a variable phase mask into the training of a cell detection network. Here we report that the joint optimization continuously updates the phase mask, improving the image quality for better cell detection. Our methods efficacy is demonstrated through both simulations and experiments, revealing substantial enhancements in imaging quality compared to traditional Gaussian light sheet. We offer valuable insights for designing microscopy systems through a computational approach that exhibits significant potential for advancing optics design that relies on deep learning models for analysis of imaging datasets.

scientific communication and education↗
bioRxiv2023

High Impact: Wikipedia sources and edit history document two decades of the climate change field

Since being founded in 2001, Wikipedia has grown into a trusted source of knowledge online, feeding Google search results and serving as training data for ChatGPT. Understanding the accuracy of its information, the sources behind its articles and their role in the transference of knowledge to the public are becoming increasingly important questions. Meanwhile, climate change has moved to the forefront of scientific and public discourse after years of warnings from the scientific community. Therefore, to understand how it was represented on English Wikipedia, we deployed a mixed-method approach on the article for "Effects of climate change" (ECC), its edit history and references, as well as hundreds of associated articles dealing with climate change in different ways. Using automated tools to scrape data from Wikipedia, we saw new articles were created as climatology-related knowledge grew and permeated into other fields, reflecting a growing body of climate research and growing public interest. Our qualitative textual analysis shows how specific descriptions of climatic phenomena became less hypothetical, reflecting the real-world public debate. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had a big impact on content and structure, we found using a bibliometric analysis, and what made this possible, we also discovered through a historical analysis, was the impactful work of just a few editors. This research suggests Wikipedias articles documented the real-world events around climate change and its wider acceptance - initially a hypothesis that soon became a regretful reality. Overall, our findings highlight the unique role IPCC reports play in making scientific knowledge about climate change actionable to the public, and underscore Wikipedias ability to facilitate access to research. This work demonstrates Wikipedia can be researched using both computational and qualitative methods to better understand transference of scientific information to the public and the history of contemporary science.

scientific communication and education↗