How Quality Can Improve Reproducibility
This chapter deals with the reproducibility of scientific results that is emerging as a problem undermining not only the value of research, delaying the exploitation of outcomes and wasting valuable resources, but also its credibility. The phenomenon of irreproducibility is described and analysed with data taken from the press and the scientific environment, and reasons and possible solutions are discussed. The management of research according to quality principles and methods is then presented as the most promising approach to maintain the proper control on the process of scientific discovery and the guaranteeing of good results.
KeywordsReproducibility Quality Quality management Credibility of science Paper retraction Misconduct Fraud Scientific errors Research integrity
- 2.Trouble at the lab—scientists like to think of science as self-correcting. To an alarming degree, it is not. The Economist. 2013. http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21588057-scientists-think-science-self-correcting-alarming-degree-it-not-trouble. Accessed 13 Sep 2017.
- 3.How Science goes wrong—scientific research has changed the world. Now it needs to change itself. The Economist. 2013. http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21588069scientificresearchhaschangedworldnowitneedschangeitselfhowsciencegoeswrong. Accessed 13 Sep 2017.
- 4.Achenbach J. The new scientific revolution: reproducibility at last. The Washington Post. 2015. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/the-new-scientific-revolution-reproducibility-at-last/2015/01/27/ed5f2076-9546-11e4-927a-4fa2638cd1b0_story.html?utm_term=.61cd223ff312. Accessed 26 Sep 2017.
- 5.Naik G. Scientists’ elusive goal: reproducing study results. The Wall Street Journal. 2011. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970203764804577059841672541590. Accessed 26 Sep 2017.
- 10.Zimmer C. A sharp rise in retractions prompts calls for reform The New York Times. 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/17/science/rise-in-scientific-journal-retractions-prompts-calls-for-reform.html. Accessed 2 Oct 2017.
- 21.Nature: challenges in irreproducible research. http://www.nature.com/news/reproducibility-1.17552. Accessed 13 Sep 2017.
- 23.COPE: code of conduct and best practice guidelines for journal editors. 2011. https://publicationethics.org/files/Code%20of%20Conduct_2.pdf. Accessed 13 Sep 2017.
- 24.COPE: code of conduct for journal publishers. 2011. https://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_publishers_Mar11.pdf. Accessed 13 Sep 2017.
- 25.Davies R. Good research practice: it is time to do what others think we do. Quasar-RQA. 2013;124:21–3.Google Scholar
- 26.Baker M. How quality control could save your science. Nature. 2016.; http://www.nature.com/news/howqualitycontrolcouldsaveyourscience1.19223
- 27.OECD: OECD series on principles of good laboratory practice (GLP) and compliance monitoring (1995–2006). http://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/oecdseriesonprinciplesofgoodlaboratorypracticeglpandcompliancemonitoring.htm. Accessed 13 Sep 2017.
- 28.US Food and Drug Administration: ICH international conference on harmonization of technical requirements for registration of pharmaceuticals for human use Q10 pharmaceutical quality system. 2009. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidances/ucm073517.pdf. Accessed 13 Sep 2017.
- 29.Directorate-General for Research and Innovation Science in Society: options for strengthening responsible research and innovation. Report of the expert group on the state of art in Europe on responsible research and innovation. 2013. https://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/options-for-strengthening_en.pdf. Accessed 13 Sep 2017.
- 30.ISO 9001:2015 Quality management systems—requirements.Google Scholar
- 32.Biasini V. Implementation of a quality management system in a public research centre. Accred Qual Assur. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00769-012-0936-9.
- 33.Jefferson T. Quality and value: models of quality control for scientific research. Nature. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05031.
- 34.UK Government: joint code of practice for research (JCoPR). 2015. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/joint-code-of-practice-for-research-jcopr. Accessed 13 Sep 2017.
- 35.RQA working party on quality in non-regulated research. Guidelines for quality in non-regulated scientific research booklet. RQA. 2008–2014.Google Scholar
- 36.RQA: quality systems workbook. 2013. https://www.therqa.com/assets/js/tiny_mce/plugins/filemanager/files/Publications/RQA_Quality_Systems_Workbook.pdf. Accessed 18 Sep 2017.
- 37.WHO: TDR handbook: quality practices in basic biomedical research. 2010. http://www.who.int/tdr/publications/documents/quality_practices.pdf?ua=1. Accessed 13 Sep 2017.
- 38.Singapore statement on research integrity. 2010. http://www.singaporestatement.org/index.html. Accessed 13 Sep 2017.