| scholarly article | Q13442814 |
| P356 | DOI | 10.7554/ELIFE.16800 |
| P953 | full work available at URL | http://elifesciences.org/lookup/doi/10.7554/eLife.16800 |
| P3181 | OpenCitations bibliographic resource ID | 4099156 |
| P932 | PMC publication ID | 4973366 |
| P698 | PubMed publication ID | 27387362 |
| P50 | author | Philip Bourne | Q7183255 |
| Brian Nosek | Q22096791 | ||
| Tal Yarkoni | Q23992215 | ||
| Erin C. McKiernan | Q42453942 | ||
| Amye Kenall | Q53104346 | ||
| Courtney K Soderberg | Q53104357 | ||
| Kara H Woo | Q53104364 | ||
| Jennifer Lin | Q53104371 | ||
| Stuart Buck | Q56398024 | ||
| C. Titus Brown | Q28368081 | ||
| Karthik Ram | Q42036028 | ||
| P2093 | author name string | Amye Kenall | |
| Jennifer Lin | |||
| Stuart Buck | |||
| Jeffrey R Spies | |||
| Kara H Woo | |||
| Andrew Updegrove | |||
| Courtney K Soderberg | |||
| Damon McDougall | |||
| Kaitlin Thaney | |||
| P2860 | cites work | Who's Afraid of Peer Review? | Q15148669 |
| Self-selected or mandated, open access increases citation impact for higher quality research | Q21030652 | ||
| Citation advantage of open access articles | Q21030653 | ||
| The Impact Factor Game | Q21090147 | ||
| Open access versus subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact | Q21093238 | ||
| A survey of authors publishing in four megajournals | Q21128723 | ||
| Deep impact: unintended consequences of journal rank | Q21129393 | ||
| The case for open preprints in biology | Q21145724 | ||
| The data paper: a mechanism to incentivize data publishing in biodiversity science | Q21284328 | ||
| Peer Review Quality and Transparency of the Peer-Review Process in Open Access and Subscription Journals | Q22665458 | ||
| A practical guide for improving transparency and reproducibility in neuroimaging research | Q22914736 | ||
| Badges to Acknowledge Open Practices: A Simple, Low-Cost, Effective Method for Increasing Transparency | Q24052598 | ||
| Free online availability substantially increases a paper's impact. | Q55034855 | ||
| Funders punish open-access dodgers. | Q55057994 | ||
| Getting cited: Does open access help? | Q56268889 | ||
| The citation advantage of open-access articles | Q56417137 | ||
| Code Sharing Is Associated with Research Impact in Image Processing | Q56417159 | ||
| Self‐selection and the citation advantage of open access articles | Q57530887 | ||
| arXiv E-prints and the journal of record: An analysis of roles and relationships | Q57768436 | ||
| The citation impact of Open Access agricultural research | Q57815824 | ||
| COST EFFECTIVENESS OF OPEN ACCESS PUBLICATIONS | Q59186918 | ||
| The Citation Impact of Digital Preprint Archives for Solar Physics Papers | Q60706066 | ||
| Anatomy of green open access | Q61687466 | ||
| Citing and reading behaviours in high-energy physics | Q63386822 | ||
| Ecological data sharing | Q66677685 | ||
| All trials registered, all results reported | Q87796319 | ||
| Knowledge infrastructures in science: data, diversity, and digital libraries | Q105078966 | ||
| What lies beneath?: Knowledge infrastructures in the subseafloor biosphere and beyond | Q105078969 | ||
| Does the arXiv Lead to Higher Citations and Reduced Publisher Downloads for Mathematics Articles? | Q109813346 | ||
| Preprints for the life sciences | Q24204885 | ||
| A reliability-generalization study of journal peer reviews: a multilevel meta-analysis of inter-rater reliability and its determinants | Q24288722 | ||
| Publishers withdraw more than 120 gibberish papers | Q24289341 | ||
| Practices in source code sharing in astrophysics | Q24494659 | ||
| Effect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers' recommendations: a randomised trial | Q24648998 | ||
| Open access publishing, article downloads, and citations: randomised controlled trial | Q24651953 | ||
| Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research | Q24669742 | ||
| Toward Reproducible Computational Research: An Empirical Analysis of Data and Code Policy Adoption by Journals | Q27826355 | ||
| A Practical Guide for Improving Transparency and Reproducibility in Neuroimaging Research | Q27826377 | ||
| The case for open computer programs | Q27921796 | ||
| An Open, Large-Scale, Collaborative Effort to Estimate the Reproducibility of Psychological Science | Q28264997 | ||
| Open access, readership, citations: a randomized controlled trial of scientific journal publishing | Q28308102 | ||
| Making Data Sharing Count: A Publication-Based Solution | Q28528513 | ||
| Likelihood of Null Effects of Large NHLBI Clinical Trials Has Increased over Time | Q28644044 | ||
| Data reuse and the open data citation advantage | Q28650012 | ||
| Data sharing in neuroimaging research | Q28730743 | ||
| Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science | Q28922478 | ||
| Investigating Variation in Replicability | Q28969609 | ||
| Does open access in ophthalmology affect how articles are subsequently cited in research? | Q30484184 | ||
| ORCID: a system to uniquely identify researchers | Q30512726 | ||
| Comment: Making data count | Q30996018 | ||
| Open peer review: a randomised controlled trial | Q33900096 | ||
| Impact factors: uses and abuses | Q34601542 | ||
| Effect on peer review of telling reviewers that their signed reviews might be posted on the web: randomised controlled trial | Q37809927 | ||
| Importance of the lay press in the transmission of medical knowledge to the scientific community | Q41161068 | ||
| P4510 | describes a project that uses | scikit-learn | Q1026367 |
| P407 | language of work or name | English | Q1860 |
| P921 | main subject | open science | Q309823 |
| P304 | page(s) | e16800 | |
| P577 | publication date | 2016-07-07 | |
| P1433 | published in | eLife | Q2000008 |
| P1476 | title | How open science helps researchers succeed | |
| P478 | volume | 5 |
| Q55012301 | A Data Citation Roadmap for Scientific Publishers |
| Q91601858 | A Perspective on Extreme Open Science: Companies Sharing Compounds without Restriction |
| Q58194746 | A Practical Guide for Transparency in Psychological Science |
| Q91361428 | A beginner's guide to data stewardship and data sharing |
| Q59134700 | A data citation roadmap for scientific publishers |
| Q48448622 | A few simple steps to improve the description of group results in neuroscience |
| Q108530218 | A global questionnaire survey of the scholarly communication attitudes and behaviours of early career researchers |
| Q106300595 | A long-term (1965–2015) ecological marine database from the LTER-Italy Northern Adriatic Sea site: plankton and oceanographic observations |
| Q50200057 | A lost opportunity for science: journals promote data sharing in metabolomics but do not enforce it. |
| Q106988006 | A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review |
| Q33269085 | A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review |
| Q110684317 | An Agenda for Open Science in Communication |
| Q77322582 | An open toolkit for tracking open science partnership implementation and impact. |
| Q49945385 | Another step towards scientific transparency: Requiring research materials for publication |
| Q110961882 | Assessing the effect of article processing charges on the geographic diversity of authors using Elsevier’s “Mirror Journal” system |
| Q89986852 | Availability of Research Data in High-Impact Addiction Journals with Data Sharing Policies |
| Q28597886 | Being open: our policy on source code |
| Q57005086 | Best Practice Data Life Cycle Approaches for the Life Sciences |
| Q56395721 | Best practice data life cycle approaches for the life sciences |
| Q100732949 | Beyond Ecosystem Modeling: A Roadmap to Community Cyberinfrastructure for Ecological Data-Model Integration |
| Q61734226 | COMPare: a prospective cohort study correcting and monitoring 58 misreported trials in real time |
| Q91352726 | Call of Duty at the Frontier of Research: Normative Epistemology for High-Risk/High-Gain Studies of Deep Brain Stimulation |
| Q111149605 | Common-sense approaches to sharing tabular data alongside publication |
| Q42364042 | Compliance with minimum information guidelines in public metabolomics repositories |
| Q90206872 | Correction to 'Open science and modified funding lotteries can impede the natural selection of bad science' |
| Q112043011 | Could Open Design learn from Wikipedia? |
| Q52646903 | DASH, the data and specimen hub of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. |
| Q47155012 | Data Sharing: Convert Challenges into Opportunities |
| Q56477315 | Data sharing in psychology |
| Q91466128 | Data sharing practices in randomized trials of addiction interventions |
| Q91287988 | Data-Driven Materials Science: Status, Challenges, and Perspectives |
| Q98950265 | Database of virtual objects to be used in psychological research |
| Q95261482 | Dataset decay and the problem of sequential analyses on open datasets |
| Q30491876 | Developing a data sharing community for spinal cord injury research. |
| Q104577363 | Developing an open educational resource for open research: Protocol for the PaPOR TRAIL project |
| Q34381225 | Developing international open science collaborations: Funder reflections on the Open Science Prize |
| Q108530222 | Does the scholarly communication system satisfy the beliefs and aspirations of new researchers? Summarizing the Harbingers research |
| Q110972035 | Dynamics of cumulative advantage and threats to equity in open science: a scoping review |
| Q92494498 | Early Impact of the Western Journal of Emergency Medicine CDEM/CORD Special Issue in Educational Research & Practice |
| Q47137370 | Early career researchers want Open Science. |
| Q38650941 | Enabling Open Science for Health Research: Collaborative Informatics Environment for Learning on Health Outcomes (CIELO). |
| Q47553856 | Equifinality in empirical studies of cultural transmission |
| Q47225773 | Establishing a distributed national research infrastructure providing bioinformatics support to life science researchers in Australia. |
| Q99356058 | Expanding the actions of Open Government in higher education sector: From web transparency to Open Science |
| Q38369416 | Four simple recommendations to encourage best practices in research software |
| Q42183997 | Imagining the "open" university: Sharing scholarship to improve research and education |
| Q30491888 | Imagining tomorrow's university in an era of open science. |
| Q101633112 | Inadequate treatment of taxonomic information prevents replicability of most zoological research |
| Q109590265 | Indicator of quality for environmental articles on Wikipedia at the higher education level |
| Q107608454 | Investigating the division of scientific labor using the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) |
| Q90256484 | Journal Self-Citation Rates and Impact Factors in Dentistry, Oral Surgery, and Medicine: A 3-year Bibliometric Analysis |
| Q98156786 | Low availability of code in ecology: A call for urgent action |
| Q108864027 | Making ERP research more transparent: Guidelines for preregistration |
| Q30489733 | Meta-analysis of psychophysiological interactions: Revisiting cluster-level thresholding and sample sizes |
| Q64116858 | Natural language processing of symptoms documented in free-text narratives of electronic health records: a systematic review |
| Q110663833 | Open Access journals need to become first choice, in invasion ecology and beyond |
| Q56396006 | Open Access. Open Science. Open Urology |
| Q106196301 | Open Science in the Humanities, or: Open Humanities? |
| Q90138717 | Open Science is for Aging Research, Too |
| Q47483103 | Open Science now: A systematic literature review for an integrated definition |
| Q93188204 | Open Up - the Mission Statement of the Control of Impulsive Action (Ctrl-ImpAct) Lab on Open Science |
| Q90565968 | Open access medical journals: Benefits and challenges |
| Q66680702 | Open collaborative writing with Manubot |
| Q92651741 | Open science and modified funding lotteries can impede the natural selection of bad science |
| Q101217433 | Open science approaches to COVID-19 |
| Q91668293 | Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond |
| Q58555099 | Open science, reproducibility, and transparency in ecology |
| Q56888468 | Our path to better science in less time using open data science tools |
| Q56083152 | Packaging Data Analytical Work Reproducibly Using R (and Friends) |
| Q100757651 | Peer review and preprint policies are unclear at most major journals |
| Q111841307 | Peer review and preprint policies are unclear at most major journals |
| Q95298322 | Peer-Review and Rejection Causes in Submitting Original Medical Manuscripts |
| Q104513675 | Perils of Race-Based Norms in Cognitive Testing: The Case of Former NFL Players |
| Q59480420 | Promoting Open Science to Increase the Trustworthiness of Evidence in Special Education |
| Q47169122 | PubRunner: A light-weight framework for updating text mining results. |
| Q64070331 | Publishing Open, Reproducible Research With Undergraduates |
| Q125142541 | Quantifying research waste in ecology |
| Q49795367 | Registration of systematic reviews in PROSPERO: 30,000 records and counting |
| Q104080017 | Relational data paradigms: What do we learn by taking the materiality of databases seriously? |
| Q97550683 | Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0. |
| Q38863861 | Reporting guidance considerations from a statistical perspective: overview of tools to enhance the rigour of reporting of randomised trials and systematic reviews |
| Q91620692 | Reproducibility and Transparency by Design |
| Q53401382 | Reproducible and Replicable Pain Research: A Critical Review. |
| Q56394799 | Reproducible research and GIScience: an evaluation using AGILE conference papers |
| Q47637341 | Reproducible research practices are underused in systematic reviews of biomedical interventions |
| Q60549978 | Research Data Sharing: Practices and Attitudes of Geophysicists |
| Q110949512 | Research artifacts and citations in computer systems papers |
| Q56373895 | Routine In Vitro Culture of Plasmodium falciparum: Experimental Consequences? |
| Q106591742 | SARS-CoV-2 viral load peaks prior to symptom onset: a systematic review and individual-pooled analysis of coronavirus viral load from 66 studies |
| Q90943401 | Scholarly reputation |
| Q90985510 | Science as behaviour: Using a behaviour change approach to increase uptake of open science |
| Q98460211 | Simple and Efficient Data Analysis Dissemination for Individual Labs |
| Q108903422 | Snakes on a Spaceship—An Overview of Python in Heliophysics |
| Q108530226 | So, are early career researchers the harbingers of change? |
| Q30234395 | Strengthening Renal Registries and ESRD Research in Africa |
| Q47819984 | Strengthening the Practice of Exercise and Sport Science. |
| Q53417138 | Striving for transparent and credible research: practical guidelines for behavioral ecologists. |
| Q98209024 | Structure of the Pandemic |
| Q42255083 | Systematic integration of biomedical knowledge prioritizes drugs for repurposing |
| Q59758421 | Systematic integration of biomedical knowledge prioritizes drugs for repurposing |
| Q46264375 | Systematically linking tranSMART, Galaxy and EGA for reusing human translational research data. |
| Q63852470 | Ten Hot Topics around Scholarly Publishing |
| Q112669795 | Ten principles for generating accessible and useable COVID‐19 environmental science and a fit‐for‐purpose evidence base |
| Q91986492 | Ten simple rules for innovative dissemination of research |
| Q112055068 | The Museum Studies Literature: Revisiting Traditional Methods of Discovery and Access, Exploring Alternatives, and Leveraging Open Access to Advance the Field |
| Q64032169 | The Open Traits Network: Using Open Science principles to accelerate trait-based science across the Tree of Life |
| Q41990341 | The SysteMHC Atlas project |
| Q56417192 | The case for openness in engineering research |
| Q57775524 | The case for openness in engineering research |
| Q61819929 | The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future |
| Q92333486 | The future of medical publication as we move towards the second half of the 21st century |
| Q94523483 | The open access financial model hinders the growth of medical physics research in low- and middle-income countries |
| Q56755189 | The project EcoNAOS: vision and practice towards an open approach in the Northern Adriatic Sea ecological observatory |
| Q100466714 | The reuse of public datasets in the life sciences: potential risks and rewards |
| Q49510981 | The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles |
| Q91110687 | Three Changes Public Health Scientists Can Make to Help Build a Culture of Reproducible Research |
| Q90462631 | Toward an integrative perspective on the neural mechanisms underlying persistent maladaptive behaviors |
| Q104466107 | Transparency in Clinical Trials: adding value to Paediatric Dental Research |
| Q58747987 | Use of reproducible research practices in public health: A survey of public health analysts |
| Q105979475 | Using R in hydrology: a review of recent developments and future directions |
| Q30491734 | We can shift academic culture through publishing choices. |
| Q96131231 | Where Does Open Science Lead Us During a Pandemic? A Public Good Argument to Prioritise Rights in The Open Commons |
| Q37713173 | Who Believes in the Storybook Image of the Scientist? |
| Q53831677 | Will Open Access Close the Door on Traditional Journal Publishing? |
| Q60521075 | Writing Empirical Articles: Transparency, Reproducibility, Clarity, and Memorability |
| Q42103578 | Writing for different readers. |
Search more.