Natalie Rodrigue’s Post

Transparency or Accountability in Research One common issue in research articles, whether published online or in prestigious journals, is the lack of clarity in reporting the Quality of the study. Often, vague expressions are used, such as "a test was conducted to calculate reliability or validity" in quantitative research, or phrases like "steps were taken to ensure credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability" in qualitative research. However, these articles frequently lack detailed discussions or concrete evidence to support these claims. For qualitative studies, examples of findings are often omitted, while quantitative studies may fail to provide actual numbers or statistical details. This creates an impression that such claims are to be accepted without question, undermining transparency and accountability in research. How can we address this problem? What are your thoughts? Is accepting such practices without critique detrimental to the rigor of scientific inquiry?

The Methods Section (Part 1) ✨ Why Methods Matter ✨ 🔬 The Methods section was once the part of a paper most likely to be abbreviated, overly summarized, or hidden away on publishers’ websites. While some journals still place additional details in supplementary sections, the push for greater reproducibility and scientific rigor has brought the Methods section back to center stage. 📊 Today, Methods are essential for establishing research credibility, alongside open access to data and results. This shift emphasizes transparency and trustworthiness, giving readers the information they need to evaluate and replicate studies. Source: https://lnkd.in/ga8gVRi2 🔗 #WhyMethodsMatter #ResearchMethods #ScientificRigor Abdul-Aziz Seidu, PhD REMS Consult

Submission Guidelines (Article Main Body) 1. Introduction: Setting Objectives and Reviewing Literature In this comprehensive section, articulate the specific objectives of your research and situate them within the broader scientific discourse. Provide a thorough background by reviewing relevant literature and summarizing the historical context and previous studies pertinent to your research area. Incorporate a concise literature review to highlight key findings, knowledge gaps, and the evolution of thought in the field. 2. Experimental procedure/Theory/Calculation: Research Methodology Here, meticulously detail the experimental procedures, theoretical frameworks, or calculations employed in your study. Ensure that there is enough information for independent researchers to replicate your work. Summarize previously published methods with appropriate references, and if directly quoting, use citation and quotation marks. Describe any modifications made to existing methods. 3. Results and discussion: Insightful Analysis and Interpretation Combine your results and discussion into a cohesive section. Present your findings clearly and avoid repetition. Discuss the implications and significance of your results, steering clear of extensive citations or reiteration of published literature. 4. Conclusions: Key Takeaways Summarize the primary conclusions of your study in a succinct conclusions section. Reinforce the key findings and their implications for advancing scientific knowledge.

Legal Information:  Regulatory texts in the form of scientific cookbooks are a comprehensive model for research. Step-by-step instructions are provided on how to use an analytical method or alternative. By clearly describing the research process, these statements ensure that others can replicate the research and verify the findings. This enhances transparency and builds on existing knowledge. Broader discourse provides researchers with the skills to understand and apply new methodologies within their field of study. This creates a more diverse and complex research environment. In addition to these two main categories, there are a few other research issues that you may encounter.

Research articles: All you need to know A journal research article typically follows the IMRaD format. This widely spread structure stands for Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. Researchers use IMRaD because it is easy to follow and read as well as youк study becomes more organized and convincing. The style of journal papers is usually formal and governed by strict formatting standards. In fact, the format may vary depending on a journal that is why it is highly recommended to use journal guidelines in order to comply with the requirements. Additional sections from journals include an abstract, keywords, literature review, conclusions, acknowledgements, ethical statements, and references. Please read the whole article on our website https://lnkd.in/d9dJ5MbS WhatsApp +44 7465 6919 81

Remember, mere theatrics and surface-level knowledge won’t lead to success; only rigorous, publishable work will. Misleading others may work temporarily, but it harms the reputation and ranking of your institution because you won’t be able to publish. Many universities and colleges today struggle with low global rankings due to insufficient publications, citations, and research funding from internationally recognized bodies. If you genuinely understand research, consultations can become a valuable revenue stream, attracting clients through your quality work. True expertise benefits both your institution’s standing and your own career. Invest the time to learn—it’s normal to make mistakes in the beginning; that’s part of the journey. Surround yourself with the right people who can guide you. Imagine if an institute has 100 researchers, and each contributes at least five articles a year. They would accumulate 500 articles annually, leading to 5,000 articles in just 10 years within the Scopus database. Why is this not achievable? If researchers know how to write and draft articles, they can certainly produce at least systematic literature reviews, even if not every research-based article is feasible. While publishing in a Q1 journal may be challenging, why not aim for a Q4 journal or any other? The key is to publish—if you write, you’ll at least get published somewhere. And let’s not forget preprints; they also get indexed and count as publications. Let's make research a priority! Research is vital for the welfare of mankind. Today, even the cellphone you are using exists thanks to extensive research and development. Similarly, advancements in medicine and various other fields are driven by research efforts.

I just finished my review of a document proposed to be published in the Journal "Smart Materials and Structures" hosted by IOP Publishing. As usual, I'm leaving here some important considerations for authors when looking to advance and submit their work to be published: ✓ IF the author's main concern is about "intellectual property", I strongly advise first taking care of such "bureaucratic" tasks, followed by the publication of both experimental data and the algorithms for each model in a data repository, and only after all that is completed and made available, submit the document to a journal to be evaluated for publication. ✓ A research document without data is ... a blog post or an internet article. Authors need a data source, for instance, a repository that a reviewer can use to analyze and evaluate the document. ✓ A work that evaluates accuracy with typical statistical mean values ( RSME, MAE, MAPE) is insufficient to characterize the performance of the models discussed. It will have much less scientific value for the authors and the journal when published.  It is well-known that "accuracy" is a good performance indicator in global analysis and assessment, however, other statistical parameters are needed, preferably ones that are able to infer performance with more detail and less "globally" / superficial. For many reasons, authors need to discuss, in their findings and work. #openScience #DataRepositories #openInnovation #TransparencyInScience #openPublishing #SafetyInScience Elsevier Sage Taylor & Francis Group ORCID Web of Open Science Clarivate MDPI Irma Assunção Raffaella Traverso Carlos Gonçalves Daniel Amorim Madalena Peixoto Arnaldo Machado Vitor Monteiro Martins Moises Guilherme Abreu Barbosa Aníbal José F. Pinto Ribeiro Ana Berta Rego José Amarilio Barbosa Anerí Pinto Natacha Jalali Santos Patrick Noordhoek Catherine Caruana-McManus Cláudia Condessa

Ironic failure of scientific scrutiny: A high-profile paper about ways to improve the rigor of research papers has been retracted, because... its own rigor has been questioned. The authors acknowledge “elemental errors” in their work that aimed at showing ways to boost research replicability. The study, published last year in Nature Human Behaviour, now raises the following concerns: 1. lack of transparency; 2. misstatement of the hypotheses and predictions the reported metastudy was designed to test; 3. lack of preregistration for measures and analyses supporting the titular claim; 4. selection of outcome measures and analyses with knowledge of the data; and 5. incomplete reporting of data and analyses. https://lnkd.in/eiaszJTW #ScienceIntegrity #ReplicationCrisis #MetaResearch

Elevate the Standards of Regenerative Medicine Research 🌱 📌 Ethical publishing is key to advancing regenerative medicine. We uphold the highest standards to ensure research is reliable, transparent, and trustworthy." ⚡ As an author, you play a vital role. Here’s how to maintain ethical publishing standards: 📌 Honest Reporting: Present data accurately; avoid manipulation. 📌 Proper Citation: Always credit original work; avoid plagiarism. 📌 Conflicts of Interest: Be transparent about potential biases. 📌 Peer Review Integrity: Submit only original work and respect the review process. 💡 Submit your research at https://lnkd.in/dtV_iEMt #EthicalPublishing #RegenerativeMedicine #ResearchIntegrity #PublishingEthics #AcademicResearch #BiologyResearch

A literature review should provide a comprehensive and critical analysis of existing research relevant to a particular topic or research question. Begin by clearly defining the scope and objectives of your review, ensuring you cover key themes and studies that align with your research aims. Use a systematic approach to search for literature, utilizing academic databases, journals, and other credible sources. Organize the literature thematically or chronologically, summarizing key findings and identifying gaps, inconsistencies, and areas of consensus. Critically evaluate the methodologies, theoretical frameworks, and conclusions of the studies reviewed, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses. Ensure that your review synthesizes the information, providing a coherent narrative that supports your research context and rationale. Finally, properly cite all sources using a consistent citation style, and consider the inclusion of a reference management tool to maintain organization and accuracy. A well-conducted literature review should not only summarize existing knowledge but also demonstrate your understanding of the field and justify the need for your research.