Christine Laine, MD, MPH, Senior Deputy Editor; Steven N. Goodman, MD, PhD, MHS, Associate Editor; Michael E. Griswold, PhD, Associate Editor; Harold C. Sox, MD, Editor
Laine C., Goodman S., Griswold M., Sox H.; Reproducible Research: Moving toward Research the Public Can Really Trust. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:450-453. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-146-6-200703200-00154
Download citation file:
Published: Ann Intern Med. 2007;146(6):450-453.
A community of scientists arrives at the truth by independently verifying new observations. In this time-honored process, journals serve 2 principal functions: evaluative and editorial. In their evaluative function, they winnow out research that is unlikely to stand up to independent verification; this task is accomplished by peer review. In their editorial function, they try to ensure transparent (by which we mean clear, complete, and unambiguous) and objective descriptions of the research. Both the evaluative and editorial functions go largely unnoticed by the publicâ€”the former only draws public attention when a journal publishes fraudulent research. However, both play a critical role in the progress of science. This paper is about both functions. We describe the evaluative processes we use and announce a new policy to help the scientific community evaluate, and build upon, the research findings that we publish.
to gain full access to the content and tools.
Learn more about subscription options.
Register Now for a free account.
Emergency Medicine, Hematology/Oncology, Ethics.
Results provided by:
Copyright © 2016 American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.
Print ISSN: 0003-4819 | Online ISSN: 1539-3704
Conditions of Use
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only