Key Factors for Improving Rigor and Reproducibility: Guidelines, Peer Reviews, and Journal Technical Reviews

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

Abstract

To respond to the NIH's policy for rigor and reproducibility in preclinical research, many journals have implemented guidelines and checklists to guide authors in improving the rigor and reproducibility of their research. Transparency in developing detailed prospective experimental designs and providing raw data are essential premises of rigor and reproducibility. Standard peer reviews and journal-specific technical and statistical reviews are critical factors for enhancing rigor and reproducibility. This brief review also shares some experience from Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology, an American Heart Association journal, that has implemented several mechanisms to enhance rigor and reproducibility for preclinical research.

Original languageEnglish
Article number856102
JournalFrontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
Volume9
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 9 2022

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The authors' research study was supported by National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health under Award Numbers R01HL139748 and R35HL155649, and the American Heart Association SFRN in Vascular Disease (18SFRN33900001).

Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2022 Lu and Daugherty.

Keywords

  • animals
  • cardiovascular medicine
  • replicates
  • statistical analysis
  • technical review
  • vascular biology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Key Factors for Improving Rigor and Reproducibility: Guidelines, Peer Reviews, and Journal Technical Reviews'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this