@文章{信息:doi/10.2196/16078，作者=“Anderson, J Michael and Niemann, Andrew and Johnson, Austin L and Cook, Courtney and Tritz, Daniel and Vassar, Matt”，标题=“皮肤病学期刊发表文献的透明、可重复性和开放科学实践:截面分析”，期刊=“JMIR Dermatol”，年=“2019”，月=“11月”，日=“7”，卷=“2”，数=“1”，页数=“e16078”，关键词=“发现的可重复性;数据共享;出版，开放获取;背景:可重复性研究是科学进步的一个基本组成部分，但在皮肤学文献中，关于可重复性研究的程度知之甚少。目的:本研究旨在通过评估可重复性和透明研究实践的8项指标的存在来确定皮肤病学期刊文献的质量和透明度。方法:通过实施横断面研究设计，我们从国家医学图书馆目录中对皮肤病学期刊的出版物进行了高级检索。我们的搜索包括2014年1月1日至2018年12月31日之间发表的文章。在生成符合条件的皮肤病学出版物列表后，我们使用Open Access Button、谷歌Scholar和PubMed搜索全文PDF版本。使用试点测试的谷歌表格分析了出版物的可重复性和透明度的8个指标——材料、数据、分析脚本、协议、预注册、利益冲突声明、资助声明和开放获取。结果:排除后，127项具有实证数据的研究被纳入我们的分析。 Certain indicators were more poorly reported than others. We found that most publications (113, 88.9{\%}) did not provide unmodified, raw data used to make computations, 124 (97.6{\%}) failed to make the complete protocol available, and 126 (99.2{\%}) did not include step-by-step analysis scripts. Conclusions: Our sample of studies published in dermatology journals do not appear to include sufficient detail to be accurately and successfully reproduced in their entirety. Solutions to increase the quality, reproducibility, and transparency of dermatology research are warranted. More robust reporting of key methodological details, open data sharing, and stricter standards journals impose on authors regarding disclosure of study materials might help to better the climate of reproducible research in dermatology. ", issn="2562-0959", doi="10.2196/16078", url="http://derma.www.mybigtv.com/2019/1/e16078/", url="https://doi.org/10.2196/16078" }